Choć polska prezydencja w Radzie UE trwa już 9 dni, to Sejm dopiero na pierwszym w nowym roku posiedzeniu zajął się przedłożonym przez Ministra do Spraw Unii Europejskiej dokumentem: „Program Polskiej Prezydencji w Radzie Unii Europejskiej”, choć ten trafił do Izby jeszcze 11 grudnia 2024 r.
Jeśli chodzi o sprawy związane z rolnictwem, Adam Szłapka przedstawiając wspomniany program powiedział tylko tyle:
– Bezpieczeństwo to także bezpieczeństwo żywnościowe. Wszyscy doskonale zdajemy sobie sprawę, że by czuć się bezpiecznie musimy być suwerenni, jeśli chodzi o produkcję żywności. Tutaj podstawą zawsze była i będzie wspólna polityka rolna. Musimy dyskutować o tym jak wspólną politykę rozwijać, żeby wspierać europejskie rolnictwo, ale także pilnować tego, żeby było odporne na nieuczciwą konkurencję państw trzecich. Dlatego wszystkie działania i inicjatywy, które będą ograniczały i wpływały niekorzystnie na konkurencyjność europejskiego rolnictwa będziemy odrzucać.
O czym natomiast mówili w debacie posłowie?
Część skupiła się głównie na wyrażaniu oczekiwań wobec polskiej prezydencji, choć czas na tego typu postulaty – wydaje się – już dawno minął.
– Dbając o dochody europejskich rolników, oczekujemy zabezpieczenia naszych segmentów wrażliwych oraz dopełnienia obowiązku przestrzegania przez producentów spoza Unii Europejskiej unijnych kryteriów jakościowych i bezpieczeństwa żywności. Wyzwaniami w tym zakresie są oczywiście zarówno akcesja Ukrainy, jak i umowa z rynkiem Ameryki Południowej, Mercosur. Od polskiej prezydencji oczekujemy także przygotowania rolnictwa europejskiego na wyzwania związane z dramatycznymi zmianami klimatycznymi, czyli wyzwaniami, których w przeciwieństwie do umów nie jesteśmy w stanie negocjować. Efektem tych zmian są bowiem długotrwałe susze, ulewy, pożary, gradobicia, które niweczą pracę rolników. Walczmy z tymi zmianami klimatu i zatruwaniem ziemi, powietrza i wody, a nie z zielonym ładem – mówił na przykład poseł Rafał Kasprzyk (Polska 2050-TD).
Czytaj więcej
– It is also important for agriculture in the European Union and consumers, which in the assessment of the Polish minister m.inter alia, agriculture should include dialogue with farmers also based on Polish experiences. Without this dialogue it will be difficult to gain social acceptance for such writings, such as are included in the green setup. Part of the law has been changed, but a large part still needs to be changed. This is also an question of critical approach to the agreement with Mercosur. I does not only refer to the contract with Mercosure in conjunction with the critical appraisal of its impact on agriculture. Through this distancing we should also look at the perspective of the future agreement and , among other things. future membership of Ukraine. Because maybe instead of those 2 million t of meal from soy genetically modified from Mercosur we could agree with Ukraine, that it will be the place, where it produces actually this type of feed, which is needed also in Poland agriculture – said member Andrzej Grzyb (PSL-TD).
– An important area of interest to the Polish Presidency is the food security of Europe. I have on my thought not only safety and protection of European agriculture against unfair competition of countries outside the European Union, where the quality of food differs from the standards required of our farmers, this also affects health safety of persons consuming food. All international agreements extending outside the European Union should secure the quality of food in the Union in this way, that European food not be substituted by cheaper ones, but of worse quality food coming from Ukraine or other countries of South America, now covered by agreement with Mercosur. Here there can be a tariff, because it is in Poland’s interest to protect the European agricultural market, on which we are as a country potent. This market we must especially protect – said Member Arkadiusz Sikora (Left).
Void?
A little more color to this debate was introduced by MEPs of the Confederation.
– The document presented as vibrantly reminiscent of works created in the first half of the 50s. XX w. Such composed pustos cannot even be attributed to art intelligence, because they areIt just simply images. Practically in every other sentence we have the opportunity to see expressions be that are contradictory or that are so added, that their quoting threatens the hang of exposed internal emptyness. (…) We have therefore to deal with applied to border less modern newspeak, based on Marxist ideology in its different varieties, and with demented pseudo-theories – stated member Roman Fritz.
Referring to agricultural affairs, he said:
– I move to the subsection: competitive and resistant agriculture. Here the new new author follows in such words: “Safe, high quality and available food is a European good public. That’s why Europe must take care to strengthen the position of farmers in chains of value, including the stabilization of their income.” et al, itd. Tthat all issues have no rational solution. In chapter: agriculture and fishing does not any word about an agreement with Mercosur countries, about problems with the quality of food, which is imported from this area, and no word about real problems of both branches, about the planned liquidation of other branches, and that is not only in Poland.
MEP Witold Tumanowicz noted:
– Poland appears (in the document “Program of Poland Presidency in the Council EU”) only as an adjective: Poland beyond the word: presidency, on the other hand the word: Ukraine appears there 43 in the word. I will sincerely, that I think about this that. You write that you will support Ukraine’s attempt to enter the European Union. What miracle
does you want to reconcile this with attention to the interest of each Ukraine. the Polish farmer? What have we seen, which has been
led to the mass flood of technological food from the eastern border. We have seen this perfectly. Now you set your goal
to support the efforts of Ukraine to enter the European Union and at the same time you want to care for the Polish farmer. This is just not supported. The accession of Ukraine to the European Union is not any in the interest of the Polish economy, any in the interest of the Polish farmer.
Read more
Poland presidency should promote Polish interests
MEP Jaroslaw Sachajko (MP Circle Free Republicans) stated:
– The presidency of a country should be designed to that, to promote the interests of a country. I this has been acting all time: for each half year each country promotes the interests of its country. Only for some reason does Poland in this document not speak about the interests of the Polish country, and right your minister there from the speaker talks: we, Europe. That Poland is in Europe, it should be known, because it has been for over 10 centuries. More important is, where there are the interests of the Polish country. We have competitive and resilient agriculture – that is that, sorry, bullshit. Safe, high quality and available food is a European good. This everyone knows, only the state wants to destroy, to destroy the contract with Mercosur. Nothing the state is doing, to destroy it, just peacefully wait, until there is a presidential election. What will be after that is already Prime Premier Tusk has written. All, who are against, that will be polexit and Putin. I this is the state ‘s thought of governing and the survival of the Polish presidency. Mrs. Pomaska talks about the green situation. She didn’t say, that that it needs to be changed, she just said: they did that, Commissioner Wojciechowski did that. She forgot to say, that that, against which farmers protest, that is Mr. Timmermans, that is uggestion, that is the Commissioner for health, who restricts active substances, that is the Commissioner for protection of the environment, who restricts ferrals. But the state accepts everything, which the European Union gives. And here they say: we, Europeans. No, we are Polish.
MEP Tadeusz Tomaszewski (Left) questioned while:
– The Inauguration in Warsaw of the Polish Presidency in the Council of the European Union was accompanied by a protest of Polish farmers. Of the five basic postulates three of these are, first, against the Mercosur Agreement, after the second, objection to the flow of goods from Ukraine, after the third, objection to the green load. In the document on priorities of the Polish presidency we read , among other things, that.The Polish presidency will seek to form a strong common agricultural policy, that supports farmers and the development of rural areas. This policy should encourage, and not force farmers to take actions that protect the environment and indicate the benefits of preventing climate change and fighting the effects thereof. I would like to ask, how these issues, which are raised by farmers, will be treated in the work of the Polish presidency. This is about the three postulates, about which I spoke in the context of this record and signals from the minister of agriculture.
In a similar tone question was asked by Member Ryszard Bartosik (Law and Justice):
– A few days ago we witnessed an embarrassing event, when this Prime Minister Donald Tusk attempted to show, that he was opening our presidency. We saw, that despite a full room in the Great Theater he actually was there alone and he was very nervous. But then on the streets there appeared the farmers, but nobody took to them , nobody wanted to hear their postulates, and then the farmers wrote the program of this presidency. I’d like to ask, whether these postulates, such as Stop green labor, Stop the agreement with Mercosurm, Stop the flow of goods from Ukraine, Stop the destruction of Polish forests or our economy, will be implemented in some way and will you refer to this during the presidency? Because in the material, which you presented, this is unfortunately not there. You do not protect, not defend the Polish farmer.
Similar tones have also echoed in following questions (statements) members.
Minister Szłapka explains
In responses to questions by members (relating to agricultural issues) Minister Szłapka stated among other things.among others.:
in the issue Mercosur:
– There has been the government’s position on this issue, the critical government’s position on this issue, Poland is against this agreement, while in the time of the Polish presidency it is likely this issue will not enter the council of the European Union. At this stage it is underway to prepare the legal text of this agreement, which has been signed. Poland as a member country obviously objects to this and will with other member
states in this issue.
on the green settlement issue:
– I say this for the next time from this speaker, please
this to yourself on stone tables or stick very strongly in your head: Green location this is theprogramadoptedby.previousEuropeanCommission,onwhichthepreviousgovernmentMatthewMorawiecki,thisistheprogram,whichhasbeenpreparedbyJanuszWojciechowski,andthisistheprogram,of whichindividualfragmentswereagreedattheEuropeanCouncilinDecember2019.andinDecember2020year,whenPrime MinisterwasMatthewMorawiecki.Ifanyone asksthestateaboutgreentheorder,thatfirstthingthatcomestothehead,shouldalwaysbeMatthewMorawiecki.Andthisisnotjustmyopinion.JustlistentothestatementofMr.PatrickJakim,whosaid,I quote:someone hasagreedtoalloftheirjudgments,hasagreedtothisMorawiecki,orthepreviousstatementsbyMrMEPJanuszKowalski,foreverytime:greenmanager-MatthewMorawiecki.Whatwehavesucceededthroughthisyearto do,istoimprovethisgreenleadinthegrowthandintheuseofpesticides.
TheParliamenthas adoptedthegovernmentdocument.
