The Agricultural committee treated an initiative today for a “free package of measures against EU bureaucracy”. Applications from the Greens concerned fair producers: internal prices, the identification of origin of food in the catering trade and animal husbandry marking for animal products. In addition, the Greens campaigned for a ban on so-called “eternal drives” and the introduction of a transparency database for pesticide applications. With the votes of the coalition parties, all applications of the opposition were postponed.
In addition, the committee dealt with the EU projects announced for this year in the area of agriculture.
Freedomable package of measures against EU bureaucracy
With a motion for a resolution, the FPÖ called for a “package of measures against EU bureaucracy in agriculture” (28/A (e)). According to the application, the goal is a diverse, self -sufficient agriculture that can “feed us in the event of a crisis”. For this, among other things, the cancellation of the EU Renaturungs and the EU declaration regulations and a no to the Mercosur Agreement, the application says. In the committee Albert Royer (FPÖ) also underlined that it takes an exit from the “Green Deal” and that it had to end with “Gold Plating”.
Karin Doppelbauer (NEOS) said that although she was for reducing bureaucracy, it needs fair trade agreements, especially since America is doing the global economy. The European Commission has already recognized that bureaucratic simplifications were necessary. It is important to reduce the control effort in agriculture, emphasized Doppelbauer and submitted the amendment application.
The Green Deal could not be dissolved, but the new EU agricultural commissioner has already started a U-turn, said Manfred Hofinger (ÖVP).
He would like to reject this application, said Lukas Hammer (Greens). In agriculture in particular, “Gold Plating” – the overfilling of EU guidelines – could not be considered a problem, rather Austria should be proud to go beyond EU minute standards. In addition, it has nothing to do with “Gold Plating” if the freedom, as in this application, means that a “no to implement the EU legal regulations”. Because this would only lead to expensive breach of contract and would not be in the sense of democracy.
Confession for fair producers: indoor prices
The Greens addressed the “precarious income situation”, especially of small agricultural companies in Austria, with a motion for a resolution. While peasant family businesses had to be continuously close, the supermarkets would make “good profits”. The Greens therefore call for the amendment of the Faire Competition Conditions Act (FWBG), with the aim of achieving a significantly higher level of fairness and better producers: internal prices when marketing agricultural products in the food supply chain (50/A (e)).
She would not know anyone who would not like this application, said Karin Doppelbauer (NEOS). Nevertheless, she advocated waiting for the amendment to the European Commission. If this actually takes too long, you could possibly bring in a joint application, said Doppelbauer.
Andreas Kühberger (ÖVP) also described the application as “good” and pointed out that the topic was currently being discussed at European level.
There is also support for this application of his faction, said Christoph Steiner (FPÖ).
Arrival labeling in gastronomy
Community catering has been valid for meat, milk and dairy products as well as eggs since 2023. This was a “first milestone”, according to a motion for a resolution by the Greens (52/A (e)). Now it is time to take the next step and to introduce this information for meat, milk and eggs as well as their processing products by regulation in the entire gastronomy from September 1,2025. This topic has been discussed for many years, and a “very clear legal regulation is now needed,” said Olga Voglauer (Greens) on the committee.
Michael Seemayer (SPÖ) also said that this topic had been discussed “long and wide”. He referred to the government program, in which the “strengthening of the identification of origin was also included in conjunction with posture markings” and submitted the amendment application.
A refreshment is too little, Albert Royer (FPÖ) demanded that it need a mandatory labeling.
Georg Strasser (ÖVP) said that at the government negotiations of FPÖ and ÖVP, a shoulder end of hosts and peasant representatives on this topic. You want to revive this again. However, it still takes time for the dialogue, so the adjoining is in his sense, said Strasser.
Lukas Hammer (Greens) wanted to know from Minister of Agriculture Totschnig what his attitude was on this topic. Comfortable referred to the government program. This means that “initiatives to spread the stronger spread of the names of origin in the catering trade should be forced”. This was his working basis, said mansion.
Animal husbandry marking for animal products
In order to make the preparatory work done by the former Minister of Health Johannes Rauch and “finally for transparency for consumers: inside, a better life for animals and fair income for farmers: to provide the Greens by regulation, call for the introduction of a five-stage identification identification agreed with the EU internal market according to German model (53/A (e)). This should generally apply to meat and sausage products as well as for milk and milk products at all sales outlets, i.e. both in the supermarket and in gastronomy.
Elisabeth Feichtinger (SPÖ) spoke out for the combination of attitude and origin identification. The process for this is already underway, so it made the application for adjoining.
“Eternal ski chemicals” and transparency via pesticide applications
A “immediate ban” of all pesticides with PFAS ingredients (per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances) – so -called “eternal crop chemicals” – the Greens called for a further application (150/A (e)). In addition, they work with an application for the establishment of a pesticide application database by December 2025151/A (e)). “Eternal skiing chemicals” would become a major environmental issue, and agriculture could not close it, said Olga Voglauer (Greens). The problem would not be smaller, but larger, so the use of these active ingredients should be prohibited immediately. In addition, one does not know in Austria which funds are being applied, so a transparency database is needed in this regard, according to Voglauer. Lukas Hammer (Greens) emphasized that the use of “eternal slide chemicals” affects everyone, since it is chemicals that “never go away”, can have a negative impact on reproduction. There is therefore also a need for action regarding groundwater protection, said Hammer.
The application of pesticides is strictly regulated across Europe, there should be no “national go -to -go” and the evaluations at European level should be waited for, said Klaus Lindinger (ÖVP). In addition, records that can be viewed by checkpoints at any time would have to be made about the use of pesticides. Lindinger therefore submitted an adjoining request on both points.
Comfortable information about EU projects in 2025 in agriculture
Norbert Tettschnig has submitted a report on the EU projects for 2025 in the agricultural sector (III-135 d.B.). He cited the “Vision for Agriculture and Food” presented by the European Commission, the EU’s negotiations with Ukraine as part of the Association Agreement, Mercosur, the half -time check in cohesion policy and the “Blue Deal” with a European water resilience strategy. The majority of the report – without the votes of the FPÖ – was noted.
Albert Royer (FPÖ) wanted to know how the implementation of the deforestation regulations could be delayed. To death said that the provision was already in force, but the application was postponed by one year – until January 1, 2026. The application now has to be prepared nationally. The demand for an additional category in the Ordinance for Countries that do not have a drafting risk could not be brought through, but was still upright, said Tettschnig.
Maximilian Linder (FPÖ) asked about the rough content of the EU water strategy. Klaus Mair (ÖVP) wanted to know how Austria was on this strategy. After the protection of domestic water resources, Bernhard Höfler (SPÖ) asked about an intervention from abroad. Possible replied that nothing was yet known about this EU strategy. He referred to the “very good” water infrastructure in Austria that can be built on. The legal framework in Austria is already good here and it should not be “produced new bureaucracy again”, said Totschnig. To protect domestic water resources, he referred to the strict water law. In addition, there must be unanimity at an intervention on the water right at EU level. Thus, the water has a “very good security,” said homicide.
Manfred Hofinger (ÖVP) was interested in the EU strategy about generation change in agriculture and asked what Austria is doing in this area. The vision is to align agricultural policy in such a way that a successor to the court was still attractive in 2040, said Tettschnig. He emphasized that there was a very good education system for agricultural professions in Austria. Stable legal framework and stability in agricultural policy are also crucial when it comes to the subject of court succession.
Michael Seemayer (SPÖ) addressed the increase in flood disasters and wanted to know from homicide what measures are taken in this regard. Comfortable referred to the annual investments in flood protection, the torrent and avalanche construction and the constant adaptation of dangerous cards. You want to give space to rivers, so there is “wide water instead of floods”. It is “very much and exemplary”, the minister said.
Karin Doppelbauer (NEOS) asked about the “protein strategy” and, like Elisabeth Feichtinger (SPÖ), also asked, as well as suggestions from Austria, on the subject of bureaucracy in agriculture. With regard to the EU’s protein strategy, you still have to wait and see what comes to the agenda, said mansion and referred to the Austrian protein strategy. With regard to the reduction in bureaucracy, there are primarily suggestions “technical kind” – for example the deletion of documentation obligations with little added value.
Olga Voglauer (Greens) asked about the plans to redesign the GAP and “Capping” upper limits of direct payment. The budgetary question regarding the GAP must first be clarified, said mansion that everything else is “speculation in the future”. Austria has a small -scale agriculture and it is important that there should be sufficient funds, especially for the small ones, he emphasized.
Lukas Hammer (Greens) wanted to know which side of the agriculture is homicide when it comes to whether environmental and social requirements should be voluntary or binding within the framework of the GAP. Completely said that more could be achieved with voluntariness than with commitments. (Conclusion Agriculture Committee) Bea