[ad_1]
After an emotional debate, the Small House approves a legislative proposal from its economic commission.
In response to initiatives to protect pesticides and drinking water, the economic commission wants to reduce phosphorus losses from slurry: a farmer fertilizes his field in the Rhine valley of Chur.
Photo: Arno Balzarini (Keystone)
Stephan Attiger and Philippe Leuba: both are members of the government, one in Aargau and the other in Vaud. yesThey are both free minded. ORand both are signatories to a letter dated September 11 addressed to the “ladies and gentlemen” in the Council of States.. This is where the similarities end. Because the appeals of the two magistrates contradict each other – and put the Council of States in a bind.
But one after another. This afternoon covered the kChamber leine two popular initiatives that want to reduce or ban the use of pesticides. That, after the National Council, the Council of States will also reject the initiative to ban drinking water and pesticides, gold sure. Controversial war however, to what extent parliament should react to the two popular initiatives.
On the table lag A suggestion the Economic Commission of the States, of the as a kind of unofficial counterproposal too rein initiatives. He wants dReduce the risks of using pesticides; A reduction path with target values must be anchored in the law.
re2nd Economic Commission of the Council of States be Further strengthen the “ecological component of agriculture” and thus provide “answers” to the two initiatives. On the one hand, nitrogen and phosphorus losses should when grout bis 10 percent in 2025 smenken, I diem comparison to the years 2014 to 2016; yesit’s 2030 should 20 percent be. On the other hand, direct payments will be linked to new requirements, including “environmentally friendly plant protection”. After all, I should those, he like Landi stores Put feed or fertilizer on the market, provide the federal government with corresponding data on delivery to farms. The Council of States approved the proposal.
These additional demands go to the governing council Philippe Leuba too far – and with him the Conference of Cantonal Directors of Agriculture (LDK), which he presides. It is indisputable that agriculture “still has to make important and additional efforts in terms of the environment”, so Leuba in the letter that this diary has. However, the proposals “are not fully developed.” Farm managers are upset by his vision of vague terms like “environmentally friendly plant protection.”. Ofe Disclosure requirements for nutrient deliveries consider them to be “Unnecessary and too bureaucratic.” RE.aher wolltin she address the “complex issue” later, as part of the planned land reform, of the new agricultural policy from 2022 (AP22 +).
Reform package suspended
It sounds completely different from the governing council. Stephan reached – orand thus the Conference of Cantonal Environmental Directors (BPUK), which he chairs. The BPUK welcomes additional requirements in principle. Specifically: the proposed reduction pathway for nitrogen and phosphorus, as well as the disclosure requirement for nutrient deliveries. Just for the requirements for direct payments, seeBell environmental directors make adjustments. Something like thattThey are not linked to “environmentally friendly plant protection”, but to “specific selection and application” of pesticides.
rehe Federal Council welcomed the momentum of the Council of States decision.
