Nature Restoration Law survives knife-edge vote in the European Parliament amid right-wing backlash

The closely-watched session on Wednesday resulted in 336 votes in favour of the amended law and 300 against, with 13 abstentions, prompting loud applause from progressive lawmakers.

A motion to reject the legislation in its entirety, which would have dealt a heavy blow to the Green Deal, had earlier failed to garner enough support to pass.

“This law is good for even those who voted against it,” said César Luena, the Spanish MEP who serves as rapporteur and was visibly emotional. “I want to especially thank the scientists and the youth because they convinced us that we need to have this law. And we’re going to have it!”

The outcome means the regulation will be sent back to the European Parliament’s environment committee, where it had been previously voted down.

If the committee moves it forward, the European Parliament will be able to enter negotiations with member states, which have already established a common position on the file, to fine-tune the provisions and craft a compromise text that could then be endorsed by both co-legislators.

The upcoming talks, whose success is by no means guaranteed, are expected to be protracted and divisive as a consequence of the months-long controversy surrounding the Nature Restoration Law, a comprehensive proposal that aims to rehabilitate at least 20% of Europe’s degraded ecosystems by 2030.

The regulation establishes binding targets in seven fields of action, such as farmlands, peatlands, pollinators and sea bottoms, with the goal of reversing the environmental damage caused by unchecked human activity and climate change.

First presented by the European Commission in June 2022, it gained further significance after the landmark biodiversity deal struck by COP15 in December.

But in recent months, the law became the target of a no-holds-barred opposition campaign by right-wing parties, particularly by the European People’s Party (EPP), the parliament’s largest formation.

The EPP has repeatedly said the law, in its current form, would threaten the traditional livelihoods of European farmers and fishers, disrupt long-established supply chains, decrease food production, push prices up for consumers and even wipe out urban areas to make way for green spaces.

The claims have been widely contested by left-wing groups, the European Commission, dozens of NGOs, thousands of climate scientists, the renewable industry and big businesses like IKEA, H&M, Iberdrola, Unilever, Nestlé and Danone, all of whom insist nature restoration is perfectly compatible with human activity and essential to ensure the viability of European soils.

The EPP’s incessant social media outreach, which last week introduced an outlandish claim about Santa Claus, has been described as “dirty tactics” and “disinformation” by environmental organisations.

The dispute effectively split the European Parliament into two seemingly irreconcilable factions. The political debate was evident during a tense debate on Tuesday and was once again exposed by Wednesday’s razor-thin margin.

In the lead-up to the high-stakes vote, several conservative MEPs, such as Ireland’s Frances Fitzgerald, Finland’s Sirpa Pietikäinen and Czech Republic’s Stanislav Polčák, had publicly broken ranks with the EPP’s official line and declared their intention to give the Nature Restoration Law a chance to go through negotiations.