Speeches

Mr President, Commissioner, in Europe farms are being closed, but free trade agreements are being signed; We're losing breeders, but we're gaining standards. In ten years we have lost 8% of cows, 16% of goats and sheep, and the Commission is proposing to cut the agricultural budget by 20%. We ask farmers more, but we give them less. I, who raise sheep, will tell you what this report does not say enough: it does not say enough what is required of our farmers – animal welfare, zero antibiotics, but above all environmental standards XXL. On the other hand, we bring by containers products that do not respect any of this. Why are our farmers who do the most the least protected in our territory? He does not say enough that the consumer still does not know where the meat from his cooked dish comes from. Origin labelling is a matter of honesty and safety for the consumer and recognition for the breeder. To produce it better in Europe is also to produce first in Europe. We therefore need a moratorium. Be aware that farmers do not ask for alms; They only ask for justice. Nevertheless, this report lays an interesting foundation and I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Fidanza, for his listening and understanding throughout the dossier.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, you rule Europe, but you do not listen to the people. Nearly 80% of French people reject the Mercosur agreement and yetme von der Leyen pushed it through. 94% say that farmers are underpaid, but you are planning to reduce the CAP budget. 86% feel that the constraints on them are excessive, but you persist in your absurd norms and your punitive ecology. Farmers are asking for support and consistency. What do you say to them? More and more unfair competition and free trade, more and more standards and fewer prospects. The results are before our eyes: the number of farmers is decreasing, farms are disappearing and generations are no longer renewing themselves. A free people is a people that controls its food. Without strong agriculture, there is no sovereignty possible. Does Europe still want its agriculture? That's a good question. So listen to the farmers and listen to the citizens.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen of the European Commission, you have signed a new free trade agreement with Australia in opacity and haste, in defiance of farmers' warnings. Your negotiations with Australia provide for the entry of more than 30,000 tonnes of beef and as many tonnes of lamb on average. Once again, agriculture serves as an adjustment variable. Your scenario, as we already know, is the same as Mercosur: promises of controls, reassuring speeches, but, in fact, a very different reality. With Mercosur, the facts are overwhelming, traceability is flawed. Controls reveal that animals treated with estradiol 17β, a hormone banned in Europe, have been declared eligible for export. These products were sent to Europe without the importers being informed. So these are dangerous products on our plates. And yet, the Commission persists. Are we going to see another undemocratic coup, an application without a vote by MEPs and national parliaments? We have alerted on the Mercosur. The facts prove us right. You are responsible and guilty. We need to stop this leak forward.

In the end, for us, ecology is very important, really like you, there is no worry about it. There is no choice to be made in relation to ecology or the preference of drug manufacturing. In any case, the best thing is to do it in our countries, which is easier to be able to act on the environment too. This way we can avoid the waves of shortages and bad conditions on the other side of the world. In any case, it is better to do it at home than on the other side of the world. It's much more interesting in terms of ecology.

Already in France, already in the Constitution, it was obviously installed and in the end, we in our laws in France, there was no need even to put it in the Constitution, it was obvious. Anyway, there was no problem with that. We don't change our minds. The woman has the right to contraception and abortion as she wishes and this has never been changed.

Madam President, shortages of medicines are not new. They are the result of your bad industrial and political choices accumulated for years. In France, in 2025, everyday drugs (paracetamol, amoxicillin, psychotropic...) were in tension or rupture. Despite repeated alerts, you did not anticipate anything. Elsewhere in Europe, disruptions of antibiotics, anticancer drugs or insulin are multiplying. These situations have a considerable human cost: delayed treatments, degraded prescriptions, endangered patients. They reveal our dependence on globalised supply chains and the loss of our sovereignty. We need to produce more in our countries, diversify suppliers and secure stocks. In the overseas countries too, ruptures occur faster and last longer. The overseas territories must be fully integrated into this new strategy. Ensuring access to medicines is a necessity for our citizens. This is a condition of our health and industrial sovereignty.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, lumpy skin disease – the DNC – is not just a health crisis, it is a crisis of method. In France, healthy vaccinated herds have been slaughtered, and we now need to step back from these brutal methods of systematic slaughter. On the ground, breeders mostly see rigid, disconnected and brutal decisions. Farmers cannot be told that they need to vaccinate and then told that vaccination does not protect against slaughter. You can't ask them for confidence when the rules change at the worst moment. This crisis reveals a broader problem: vaccine dependence, a lack of anticipation, a lack of dialogue and respect for our farmers, who can no longer suffer yet another injustice. Protecting animal health, yes, but without sacrificing farmers or their working tools: This is what the European Union needs to hear today.

Madam President, Commissioner, this text on simplifying the CAP finally confirms what we have been denouncing for a long time: the accumulation of standards, controls, and the gradual remoteness from the realities on the ground – to the detriment of French farmers. The introduction of a single annual control per holding is a step in the right direction. It is a simple, concrete and long-awaited measure that can help restore a minimum of trust between farmers and the administration. However, of course, this progress remains limited. Simplification cannot be reduced to late technical adjustments. It must be part of a long-term change of direction based on pragmatism and respect for national realities. The European Commission bears direct responsibility for the bureaucratic asphyxiation faced by our farmers. She, who has multiplied rules, conditionalities and sanctions, is now discovering the damage she has caused herself. No, farmers do not need a Commission to monitor them, but a Commission to let them work.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, it is deeply anachronistic that we still have to debate the breeding of animals for their fur. We are talking here about minks, foxes, chinchillas locked all their lives in tiny cages, unable to express any natural behavior. This breeding generates suffering, stress, mutilations and has become morally indefensible. It does not meet any food or vital economic needs. It is a breeding of pure profit, disconnected from the essential needs of our societies and based on avoidable animal suffering. In addition, health risks in mink farms have demonstrated the real risk of transmission of zoonoses, resulting in viral reservoirs for global health. Today, 14 Member States have already banned this practice and Europe cannot stand back or accept a blatant inconsistency imposing ever-increasing standards on traditional breeders, while tolerant of a chain based on practices of another age. Economically, this activity is in decline, unsustainable and weighs on public finances. Countries, such as France, have turned the page and embarked on transitions to truly sustainable and value-creating activities. Fur, derived from animals bred solely for their fur, no longer makes sense. It is time to ban these farms and to accompany the few actors concerned towards models that respect animals as well as society. Europe must be exemplary. Let us put an end to this barbaric practice of another time.

Madam President, Commissioner, we are talking about industry, but we are also talking about our agriculture, which now also pays the price for European decisions. By taxing Chinese electric vehicles without negotiation, Brussels has triggered an immediate response against our exports of French cognac and pork. Result: a sharp fall in sales and, with it, the very concrete threat of the loss of thousands of jobs in our rural territories. Despite the negotiations conducted by Mme von der Leyen, no exemptions, no specific protection, no safety net for our producers. So I ask a simple question: How can the Commission claim to defend the interests of our agriculture if it lets our sectors of excellence serve as bargaining chips in a trade war? To accept this is to recognise Europe's inability to protect our farmers, our producers and our exports of French cognac and pork.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen of the Commission, since July I have been among the farmers in the demonstrations in Brussels and Strasbourg. They all gave me the same message: "Tell them that we no longer want their decisions that kill us." Today, I am passing it on word for word. Farmers do not want your new CAP, they do not want Ukraine to join the EU and they also do not want the Mercosur Treaty. Will you finally hear them? You are sacrificing our agriculture. No, the food sovereignty of our nations is not a line of accounting! Your budget is neither strategic nor fair: He's brutal. The Commission must review its budgetary copy. Not a patching up, but a total overhaul that protects those who feed us. Europe can survive the absence of technocrats, it will not survive the absence of farmers. And I'm here to make sure you don't forget it.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I come from Burgundy-Franche-Comté. In my region, we raise Bresse chicken, Charolais beef and refine the County. At home, a steak or sausage is a product of animal origin. There's no such thing as a vegetable steak. It is an invention of above ground communicators who want to give a natural varnish to ultra-processed products. Those who claim to defend the planet do not know the earth. They despise breeders and promote industrial products based on imported soybeans, dyes and additives. Do you think that's ecology? The human being is an omnivore. It developed thanks to a diet made from meat, eggs or milk. Replacing this with artificial proteins or dyes is denying our nature. Eating quality meat is healthy and responsible. It is to celebrate our gastronomy and our terroirs. True ecology values localism and supports breeders rather than lobbies. Sounds good.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, under the guise of environmental protection, Brussels is building a new technocratic gas plant: common chemical data platform, reallocation of powers between agencies and so on. All this is part of the same punitive ideology: turn every substance into a suspect and every exploitation into a culprit. In France, the National Agency for Health Security has just banned 17 copper-based fungicides that are essential to organic viticulture, this organic that you have put so much forward and which now no longer meets your criteria and your delusions. What the Commission wants to extend through these three texts is once again a logic of complex federalism, which weighs everything down, but does not protect anyone. The Commission continues to destroy our sectors, to undermine our agricultural sovereignty and even now our scientific sovereignty. Europe must choose reason, common sense and proportion. Because by wanting to ban everything, you will end up banning production.

Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the report before us illustrates a worrying and increasingly worrying trend. This drift is that of the Green Deal, which increasingly occupies the mental and political space of the centrists in Parliament. Cohesion policy, whose raison de vivre is to support the economy of our territories, has now been transformed into a political instrument of the European Commission's Green Deal. The Just Transition Fund is becoming conditional on ideological criteria, and the vision of this report is nothing more than the transformation of our regions into a centralised Brussels bureaucracy. The real just transition is the one that supports our farmers and our rural territories, without ideology, by supporting innovation on the ground, food sovereignty and the lowering of standards, not the one that conditions our funds to worrying drifts, ever more worrying.

Mr President, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was created to guarantee Europe its food sovereignty and to provide farmers with a dignified income. It has enabled the self-sufficiency of our nations and the development of our campaigns. It's our food shield. The European Commission is betraying this legacy. By drowning agriculture in a global fund combining cohesion, fisheries and even defence, it is emptying the CAP of its substance. Agriculture is no longer a strategic priority. Tomorrow, with Ukraine's entry into the European Union, it will be worse. Our farmers will face unsustainable competition. The CAP must not disappear. It must remain a strong, autonomous policy, faithful to its mission: feed people, protect farmers and support young people who settle. Ladies and gentlemen of the Commission, when you weaken the CAP, you threaten our food sovereignty, our campaigns and the future of our food security.

Madam President, Commissioner, the CAP is a DNA, the CAP is a spirit. Its DNA is that of the first European nations, which have built a space of peace for their peoples. Its spirit is the PAC spirit. Since 1962, this spirit accompanies our farmers at the pace of their development with a main mission: guarantee them a fair standard of living and feed our people, so as not to depend on third countries. Today, the European Commission is choosing not to substantially increase the CAP budget. This choice is to flout the spirit of the CAP. Worse still: not substantially increasing this budget while funding our farmers' direct competitors, as illustrated by last week's €15 million allocation to South African vineyards, is trampling on the very spirit of the CAP. The French know this well: A budget reveals a policy. You therefore tell them that your agricultural policy is not that of the start, but that of the local area.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission is today presenting its strategies for stockpiling emergency stocks in the face of threats to our European peoples. The objective is necessary, but it requires strong political vigilance. These stocks should not be a mere technical measure. They must embody our food sovereignty. Storing within our borders means reducing our dependence, it means strengthening our resilience, it means securing our supplies, it means protecting our old continent. Our farmers must be at the heart of this strategy. They are the guarantors of our food security, and it is not by sacrificing them once again, as with the Mercosur agreement, that we will build a sustainable model. These stocks must benefit our producers, not those on the other side of the Atlantic, for whom you have had no representative mandate. Europe must stand up for those who feed it and meet this demand.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission is today presenting its strategies for stockpiling emergency stocks in the face of threats to our European peoples. The objective is necessary, but it requires strong political vigilance. These stocks should not be a mere technical measure. They must embody our food sovereignty. Storing within our borders means reducing our dependence, it means strengthening our resilience, it means securing our supplies, it means protecting our old continent. Our farmers must be at the heart of this strategy. They are the guarantors of our food security, and it is not by sacrificing them once again, as with the Mercosur agreement, that we will build a sustainable model. These stocks must benefit our producers, not those on the other side of the Atlantic, for whom you have had no representative mandate. Europe must stand up for those who feed it and meet this demand.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the European Commission is today presenting a new pact for pollinators. The observation is shared by all. Bees, syrphs, butterflies are disappearing at an alarming rate. This decline is undermining our agriculture, food sovereignty and biodiversity in Europe. But on closer inspection, this text reflects above all the usual flaws of Brussels technocracy: objectives disconnected from agricultural realities, an avalanche of directives and an ever more massive transfer of responsibilities from the Member States to the European Union. French farmers are asked to give up certain treatments, to integrate flower strips, to diversify their crops and it is a good thing if we accompany them. But meanwhile, we continue to shamelessly import agricultural products from countries that use banned substances at home. Where's the consistency? Where's the justice? Let's be clear about protecting pollinators, it's also about defending the future of our agriculture. It is not a question of choosing between bees and farmers, but of getting out of this logic of punishment and hypocrisy. Pollution that threatens pollinating insects doesn't just come from the fields. It also comes from the air we breathe, persistent pollutants, microplastics, heavy metals and a cocktail effect of chemicals whose interactions the European Union does not yet seriously measure. These are all factors that weaken insects, but also human health. And here the Commission's text remains timid. It deals at length with pesticides, but almost nothing is said about the impact of large industrial areas, air pollution or the overall chemical load. Farmers must not become scapegoats for a globalised production system that is beyond any control. It is time to change your software, take inspiration from the Member States that are the most virtuous in this area, such as France. Forget your vision in a silo and instead think about a global approach to invisible pollutants. Beyond phytosanitary products, the whole question of the quality of our air must arise. Support farmers who have already become aware of the problem and already work to protect habitats from pollinators. Encourage research on alternatives to chemical inputs so that our farmers are not left without solutions. It is time to defend both our farmers and biodiversity with realistic, coherent and sovereign policies.

Mr President, while France imports more than 30% of the meat it consumes, Macron and von der Leyen want to open Europe's doors wide to products from South America that do not meet our standards. The agreement with Mercosur is an economic, ecological and strategic absurdity. Macron plays a double game: He claims to defend our agriculture while saying he is ready to sign the agreement on the condition of a few safeguard clauses. Crumbs. The reality is relentless: French meat production is collapsing and herds have fallen by 10% in ten years. Meanwhile, von der Leyen's European Commission continues its forcing without listening to people or respecting agricultural balances. As the Brazilian president said, France's voice no longer counts. I say it forcefully: I am against the agreement with Mercosur. We need to win back our productions, give back a future to our young people, simplify the rules. What is needed is consistency and respect for those who feed us. I defend without fail and with determination our breeders, pillars of our food sovereignty.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union is really a weather vane that changes its mind all the time. On the one hand, it is a question of integrating the CAP, the main fund for the countryside, into the overall budget of the European Union, which will reduce it. On the other hand, today we are discussing the use of cohesion funds, which are already in high demand, for rural areas. With such contradictory signals, how to trust? For years, European policies have focused on metropolises and urban areas, leaving our countryside emptying and our farms disappearing. It is finally only at the moment when urban dwellers rediscover the countryside, at the turn of teleworking, that we are again interested in these areas. You claim today that you want to help us. How can we support farmers and community-based services, because they are the ones who support these areas? Stop imposing on us your green ideology that deprives us of our means of transport. Become lucid again and learn to respect us.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I am a sheep farmer in Saône-et-Loire. Like many field professionals, I know the reality of animal transportation, which requires rigor and responsibility. As a member of the Animal Welfare Intergroup in the European Parliament, of course, I love my animals, I care for them, I feed them. I work with competent transporters, respectful of our animals. What the European Union is preparing with its reform of animal transport is yet another avalanche of totally disconnected standards, a text dictated by ideologues who know nothing about our professions, but claim to teach us how to exercise them. Magical ideas, imagined in the offices of Brussels, far, far from the reality on the ground. While we control the pauses and temperatures to the second or to the nearest degree, nobody says anything about the animals imported from the end of the world, raised without rules, thanks to your sacrosanct free trade. Hypocrisy has its limits. Yes, we must punish abuses and penalize those who mistreat animals, but, I tell you, there is no question of sacrificing our sectors and weakening our French farmers and transporters.