Relenting inactive Not Convinced
In fresh years, the European Commission, seeking to finalise a trade agreement negotiated for about 25 years with the Mercosur countries, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, has made a motion towards skeptical associate States, in peculiar Italy. This was due to the fact that it was Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni who suspended the signing of the agreement in December, although according to the president of Brazil, Luiza Inacia Luli da Silva was to ask for a period to convince Italian farmers to the agreement. Italy's position may prejudge the destiny of the agreement as its blocking requires the creation of a number of at least 4 countries representing at least 35% of the EU population.
In order to respond to the concerns of countries critical of the agreement, the European Commission has announced that since 2028 farmers will have access to €45 billion more rapidly under the fresh budgetary perspective, and 10% of the national and regional plans will receive investment in agrarian areas. In addition, after the gathering of the Ministers of Agriculture in Brussels, the EC proposed temporarily abolishing duties on selected fertilisers to lower their prices and support agricultural producers.
However, the concessions proposed by the European Commission did not change the position of Poland, France, Ireland and Hungary, which announced that despite these actions they would vote against the agreement.
Krzysztof Hetman of the PSL in an interview with RMF24 stressed that Melona's decision could be crucial for another countries.
Let's hope that Mrs Meloni, who declared in December that she had to work on this agreement and that she had to give herself more time to keep her position today said the politician.
Why so much controversy?
The EU-Mercosur Agreement is simply a long negotiated trade agreement between the European Union and Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay to facilitate trade by reducing customs duties and simplifying cooperation rules. It assumes greater access for EU companies to South American markets and increased exports of agricultural products from Mercosur to Europe.
However, opponents inform that an agreement can harm European agriculture and lead to an influx of poorer-quality food produced utilizing prohibited measures in the EU. Concerns are besides raised that the contract will benefit mainly large companies and countries exporting industry, and costs will be borne by farmers. In addition, any EU countries request stronger environmental and labour rights legislation.
Polish Euro MP Anna Bryłka from the Confederation indicated respective key reasons why, in her opinion, Poland should not accede to the EU-Mercosur agreement. It draws attention to unfair competition, as farmers from South America produce food according to rules not permitted in the EU, which puts Polish producers in a worse position. It besides raises the issue of the risks to consumers arising from lower quality and safety standards for food imports. Another argument is the hazard of failure of food sovereignty and a strong dependence on imports in crisis situations. Mr Bryłka besides stresses that the Polish agri-food sector could endure the biggest losses and that the EU's policy in this respect runs counter to declared concern for the environment.
Krzysztof Hetman of the PSL, in turn, pointed out the months-long attempts to omit the European Parliament in the process of approving the agreement. In his opinion, the deficiency of broad social consent favours tensions and protests, as illustrated by fresh events in Poland and earlier in France. He besides stressed that not only farmers, but besides representatives of many another sectors of the economy, have raised doubts about the agreement.
