Biodiversity initiative likely without counter-proposal: farmers resist further demands

class=”sc-cffd1e67-0 fmXrkB”>

The Council of States voted 25 to 18, with one abstention, against the counter-proposal, not wanting to push through one that was only available as a draft. The SP and the Greens wanted to accept the counterproposal. Yes, there were also votes from Mitte, SVP and GLP.

This means that the counter-proposal to the biodiversity initiative is off the table for the time being. The initiative calls for more biodiversity areas and more public money for biodiversity.

A voting campaign is already being prepared

The Council of States, like the National Council and the Federal Council before them, recommends saying no to the biodiversity initiative itself and decided on this voting advice with 32 votes against 12 of the SP and the Greens. According to a statement, the initiative’s sponsoring organizations are now preparing for the vote.

In the first draft of an indirect counter-proposal, the Federal Council suggested that biodiversity and protected areas should account for a total of 17 percent of the country’s surface; today it is 13.4 percent. However, the National Council has removed this number from the template.

And to build a bridge to the Council of States, the National Council subsequently defused the indirect counter-proposal, but in vain. The most recent version would no longer have focused on biodiversity areas, but rather on networking ecological areas and improvements in biodiversity areas.

There are already sufficient resources to protect biodiversity

Council members voted against speedy consideration of the counter-proposal. Beat Rieder (Centre/USA), on behalf of the Committee on the Environment (Urek-S), reported that due to time constraints the Commission was unable to elaborate in detail on the National Council’s streamlined proposal, which was only available in draft form.

The federal government and the cantons are already working on this counter-proposal. There are already sufficient resources to protect and improve biodiversity, according to Rieder.

Damian Müller (FDP/LU) added that he would rather have more time for good quality than little time for poor quality. Daniel Fässler (Centre/AI) said that even if there is no need for legislative action, action can certainly be taken in certain sectors if necessary.

Heidi Z’graggen (middle/UR) lamented the lack of a revised counter-proposal: “We only have one letter.” She proposed to restart the matter as soon as possible with a parliamentary initiative. The popular initiative could still be withdrawn until the voting date had been set.

Initiators again criticize a postponement

The proposal did not cause any joy among the initiative committee: “That would mean another postponement,” said Urs Leugger-Eggimann, director of Pro Natura, about this proposal. The need for action is enormous given the ongoing extinction of species.

A minority around Jakob Stark (SVP/TG) wanted the counterproposal. The draft defused six of the seven points criticized, Stark said. In this way, the cantons retained their powers, cities and agglomerations would be integrated and there would be no adjustments to agricultural legislation. “Entering makes it possible to make decisions on a well-founded and clear basis.”

Also Rösti for counter suggestion

The Federal Council, cantons, National Council, agriculture, environment and forestry directors and smallholder organizations supported the proposal to double Maya Graf (Greens/BL). “Action is urgent and we must take responsibility,” said Céline Vara (Greens/NE).

Vara said the initiators were willing to withdraw the initiative to speed things up if the issue could be implemented more quickly at the legislative level. Due to a lack of money, no measure from the Biodiversity Action Plan has yet been implemented.

Environment Minister Albert Rösti also wanted the counter-proposal. The debate gives the impression that the counter-proposal meets the expectations of the council members. Rösti said that the balance between city and country was important to him, both business and in terms of photography.

Source:Blick