European agricultural co-ops have reiterated their opposition to the EU-Mercosur trade deal ahead of the G20 Summit in Rio de Janeiro (18-19 November).
According to press reports, the European Commission intends to finalise the Mercosur agreement at the G20 summit after another round of negotiations in October.
Copa and Cogeca, which represent farmers and agricultural co-ops, said in a joint statement that the intention to finalise the deal is “an extremely worrying development for the European agricultural community”. The statement was also signed by the European Council of Young Farmers (CEJA), the European Federation of Food, Agriculture, and Tourism Trade Unions (EFFAT) and the Employers’ Group of Professional Agricultural Organisations in the European Union (GEOPA).
In their joint statement, the apexes called for recognising the strategic importance of agriculture and food in trade negotiations, arguing that “the economic, social and environmental sustainability of these sectors is fragile and easily disrupted”. They also pointed out that “the requirement to respect the highest environmental and social standards, including the eight fundamental ILO conventions, should be an essential and binding element of any trade agreement.”
They added: “The European agricultural sector needs a new vision that takes into account the principle of economic, social and environmental sustainability, trade reciprocity and just transition, as outlined in the report on the Strategic Dialogue on Agriculture. Signing the Mercosur agreement would be in strong contradiction with these principles.
“Copa and Cogeca, CEJA, EFFAT and GEOPA call on the EU institutions and national governments to listen to farmers and farm workers in Europe and halt the negotiations of the EU-Mercosur trade agreement.
“Farmers and farm workers ensure food is every day available on our tables. They deserve recognition and respect, not social dumping and unfair competition.”
Copa and Cogeca have also responded to the European Commission’s proposal to set up a “compensation fund” for EU farmers, which, it views as “a provocation”.
“A ‘compensation check’ does not resolve the problems of this trade agreement, as raised by our sectors and by a large part of European public opinion, including consumer representatives, trade unions and environmental organisations on the need for real reciprocity regarding production standards and risks of stimulating environmental degradation and biodiversity loss in the countries concerned,” they said.
“Instead of distracting the debate with such proposals, the Commission should be seriously taking on board the conclusions on agri-food trade raised by the report on the Strategic Dialogue on the Future of EU Agriculture that underlines the need for the Commission to “undertake a comprehensive review of its negotiations strategies” as well as the need for a higher level of reciprocity. Any other approach would jeopardise our sectors, already weakened by a difficult climatic and economic context and would risk exacerbating the tensions expressed by the European agricultural sector at the start of 2024.”
European officials told Politico the fund aims to overcome farmers’ opposition to the plan, and that of some governments, such as the French, Irish and Austrian governments.
Copa and Cogeca have also raised concerns over the potential risks of increasing imports from Brazil under the EU-Mercosur agreement, arguing it will “undermine the stringent EU standards for animal welfare, environmental protection, and consumer health.”
The two organisations pointed out that a June audit by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety, which pointed out that Brazil’s “competent authority cannot guarantee the reliability of operators’ sworn statements on non-use of oestradiol 17β in cattle”.
“Despite these findings, the EU Commission has allowed Brazilian authorities to implement a ‘self-ban’ until they can guarantee hormone-free beef exports to Europe,” they said,
The two apexes also quote findings from a forthcoming study by the European Confederation of Maize Production (CEPM), which will claim that 52% of the active substances authorised for use on maize in Brazil and Argentina have been banned in the EU for over 15 years.
Similarly, argue Copa and Cogeca, around 30 active substances authorised in sugar cane in Brazil are not longer authorised for use in sugar beet in the EU.
“These differences cannot be explained only by different conditions such as climate, soil, or mitigation measures,” said Copa and Cogeca. “An active substance considered dangerous for health or for the environment in the EU should also be considered dangerous in Mercosur countries.
“European farmers are alarmed by the potential risks of increasing imports from Brazil under the EU-Mercosur agreement as this will undermine the stringent EU standards for animal welfare, environmental protection, and consumer health.
“Allowing access to the European market for products that fail to meet these established standards would be a disservice to EU producers and consumers alike.
“We urge EU policymakers to reject this agreement in its current form and to champion a trade policy that upholds the rigorous standards of our agricultural sector and reflects European values, as underscored in the Strategic Dialogue on the Future of Agriculture.”
In 2023, a Greenpeace Germany study found that Brazilian limes sold in the EU contained residues of several pesticides, some of them banned for use in the EU.
Meanwhile, the European Commission states that EU rules will apply to all products sold in the EU, whether produced domestically or imported and the EU’s “robust system of checks” would ensure EU rules are respected. No details have been provided regarding how this would be implemented.
Mercosur, which includes Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, is the world’s fifth largest economy outside the EU, with 260 million people and an annual output of €2.2tn.
