It’s not just us – EU’S green commitments are also wobbling
IT’S been easy since Brexit to look at the European Union and see a better, more effective politics compared to the UK – and Scotland, too. Yet, as the EU sets out on its next five-year cycle – new European Parliament, new Commission, new fiveyear strategy, divvying out the top posts – the EU’S politics and democracy is looking distinctly wobbly.
Last week saw the last session of the European Parliament before elections for the new parliament on June 6-9. There has been – as always, pre-election – a frenzied push by all the big EU institutions to get key laws through. To this end, the European Parliament’s members were voting on dozens of laws last week before they headed off to hit the the campaign trail.
All this is good – democracy at work. But the EU faces big challenges both internal and external, including climate change and biodiversity crises, Russia’s war in Ukraine, Israel’s destruction of Gaza (and the EU’S ineffectual splits over that), the looming US election, the cost of living crisis, and backsliding on democracy in some member states, notably Hungary and Slovakia.
Polls ahead of the European Parliament elections suggest that the two main far-right groupings could get as much as 25% of the vote. This would be a big jump from their 18% in 2019. But it looks as if the main centre-ground parties (the centre-right European People’s Party, the centre-left Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats, the Greens, and the liberal Renew Europe) will get almost two-thirds of the vote and so be a likely controlling force.
European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, herself campaigning for a likely second term as president, has reacted nervously to these polling figures and to the wave of farmers’ protests that spread across the EU last month. Her broadly positive reputation depends largely on the ambitious and strategic European Green Deal. A whole range of measures, notably pushing towards greener industry and energy, have become law, though implementation is still key.
But the European Commission has now backed down on several vital green measures in the agricultural sector. Ms von der Leyen has led on hurriedly amending, without normal consultation measures, the hefty Common
Agricultural Policy. Environmental obligations, including ones aimed at promoting biodiversity, have been weakened or removed for smaller farmers in particular. A law to cut pesticide use by half by 2030 has been dropped. Last week, the European Parliament voted these changes through with support from the centre-right and far-right despite loud protests from environmental NGOS and many green and centre-left MEPS.
This leaves the EU’S so-called “farm to fork” green agriculture measures in tatters – and also Ms von der
Leyen’spgreen reputation. So, why has she, and the commission as a whole, done this? The most obvious reasons are to calm the farmers’ protests, to ensure continuing support from the European People’s Party for Ms von der Leyen’s second term as commission president, and to attempt to weaken the far-right’s appeal in the European Parliament elections.
It’s not obvious that this will work as an anti-far-right measure (why vote for the centre-right imitation?) and political influences vary across the 27 member states. But what these measures will do is undermine creating a crucial greener agriculture that promotes biodiversity and lowers emissions. It’s not only the commission. The major EU nature restoration law has passed the parliament but its sign-off in the council by the member states has been stymied as Hungary suddenly joined opponents to the legislation.
There’s a similar story on migration. EU member states have agreed increasingly tough asylum and migration measures in recent years, hoping to limit the success of far-right populist parties to little avail. The new, largely regressive, EU migration pact went through the parliament last month – all part of pushing through supposedly key laws ahead of the elections.
If this sounds a bit like the UK, weakening on climate measures and shrill on migration, then there is indeed a comparison to be made. At the same time, the EU’S overall commitment to its green deal trumps anything the UK is doing. Since the UK left the EU three years ago, the EU has moved forward with a range of green measures not matched by the UK. For instance, the EU has banned a range of hazardous chemicals and pesticides but the UK has not followed suit. And the Scottish Government, despite its commitment to align on the environmental laws within its competence, has so far only done so on one EU law. It’s not impressive.
There’s a wider, worrying set of
parallels between the EU, the UK and Scotland here about the quality of our democracies. Too many politicians, including political leaders, are failing to make a consistent, positive and dynamic argument for vital policies. Measures to tackle climate need to happen now. Migration – not least in the EU – can contribute positively in the face of demographic needs.
But the EU has now rowed back on its green agriculture measures. The UK, under Rishi Sunak, has announced new North Sea oil and gas licensing rounds. And Scotland is abandoning its 2030 climate targets, with SNP and Green leaders blaming each other and/or the UK for them moving out of reach, rather than taking responsibility. Labour, not to be left out, under Keir Starmer shredded its big green £28 billion commitment as if there’s no urgency at all. None of this helps to create a positive, strategic climate dialogue.
And, without a serious, consistent, honest politics, more roadblocks will loom. The EU’S leaders will agree a fiveyear strategy after the European Parliament elections. But early drafts apparently emphasise security and migration, avoiding the core push for a green Europe.
It’s not all negative. There are still vital green steps being taken, but not far or fast enough. Last year was Europe’s secondhottest year ever. Our politics needs to rise to the moment, not fracture and appease.