Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook

reads.

Farmers ignore the warning of the experts

It is a frontal attack on the System of agriculture, which warns against military appropriately fierce: For months, the Swiss farmers ' Association from the consequences of the drinking water initiative. The petition calls for the companies that use pesticides or feed for their animals to buy, by the Federal government in the future, no more payments to receive. The preparatory Committee of the national Council advises next week.

in time in this ground-breaking debate of the farmers ' Association has presented yesterday a new study. In his order, the Bern University of applied Sciences for Agricultural attitudes to forestry, and food Sciences (Hafl) investigated with model calculations of the consequences of the Initiative for eleven selected farms: the Agriculture of wine-growing and fruit - growing, up to pigs and Poultry.

The finding: To all the people would desire a "short-term negative economic impact on their revenue and agricultural income". This is valid for those five companies, which have chosen in the study to use pesticides to get more direct payments. It is true, but also on those six farms, which prefer to do without direct payments, and more use of pesticides.

the Latter would extricate himself thus from the proof of ecological performance (PEP), which is a prerequisite for the receipt of direct payments. Bauer, the President and the CVP national councillor Markus Ritter speaks therefore of a "classic Eigengoal" because the pesticide does not decrease the use in agriculture. The farmers ' Association draws a clear conclusion: "The clean water initiative failed in its purpose."

at least A daring conclusion. As the study authors themselves write, the eleven companies selected for the Swiss agriculture are not representative. "Consequently, the results can be generalized, under no circumstances," make it clear.

knight puts into perspective the findings

faced with This, speaks of knights only to a "very good orientation, where the path to be an acceptance of the Initiative might lead". How every business would head ultimately, no one could say, gives the CVP-politicians, but stresses: "The discussion of this question we can launch with this study."

For his Interpretation of the study, the farmers ' Association reaps, however, criticism. "He apparently tried by all means, the Initiative is bad talk," says Philipp Safely, managing Director of the Swiss fisheries Association (SFV). To passe, that he interpret the Text "aware of the stubborn word-for-word". In the process, offer to the Parliament in the implementation of the Initiative of considerable scope, says Sure. He refers to a – also yesterday published legal opinion of a law firm in Zurich, given by the fisheries Association in order.

How the initiative's text be interpreted?

there is disagreement about what he is talking about the initiative's text with "pesticide-free production" as a condition for the receipt of direct payments: Are those biological plants protection products included in the organic farming application? No, says the report. Yes, the farmers ' Union – and with it, the Federal Council rejects the Initiative.

it is questionable, moreover, whether there needs to be a counter-proposal to the Initiative. The fisheries Association is in favour of: bumps" in the initiative text were "precise. The builders Association believes, however, ongoing efforts are sufficient, the action plan on plant protection of the Federal government. He also relies on the targeted industry solution, the strengthening of the domestic food cultivation. The planned agricultural reform of 2022 (AP22+) contains proposals for pesticide reduction, such a reduction of the manure use.

critics, however, these measures estimate the age of as a to a little binding. Also, you complain that the voting public according to the timetable of the Federal Council, is located in 2020 over the clean water initiative, the Parliament of the AP22+, but not until 2021. The population, Safe from the fisheries Association, did not know this at the time of the referendum, how serious it was, the Parliament with the pesticide reduction. (Editorial Tamedia)

Created: 07.05.2019, 21:54 PM

Avatar
Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.