End economic inequalities

The economy belongs to everyone. We all participate in it and we are all obliged to pay our fair share. But not everyone is contributing: despite the cost of living crisis which is squeezing us all at the end of the month, billionaires have increased faster than ever and multinationals have raked in extreme profits at the expense of the most vulnerable. Yet their tax burden is close to zero. 

Give the billions back to the millions

We cannot afford an economy that favours billionaires, shareholders and multinationals over workers, families and the planet. Having fair societies where everyone contributes proportionately is not a dream, it can be a reality. All it takes is the political will to put the billions at the service of the millions. All we need to do is change the rules of the game. So that those who have the most, contribute the most.

Billions to millions visual / end economic inequalities

Tax the rich

We can and we must start taxing the wealthiest individuals and shareholders. Workers cannot be the ones that pay the highest tax rates in our societies while those who have the most hide their wealth in tax havens or store it right in front of our eyes in mansions and luxury items. 

  • We need the money to invest in a green future, one where both the planet and the people can thrive.
  • We need to invest in our public services, the pillars of our societies.
  • We cannot have an economy that is built to favour the top 0.5%.
  • The economy needs to work for the people and respect our planetary boundaries, not the other way around.

However, there is a lack of investment in the just green transition. And the recent reform of the EU’s economic governance rules will only make this worse. This means we need alternative strategies to channel investments, and a renewed focus on tax justice at EU level.

It’s time to make “tax the rich” go from slogan to reality. Because if the top 0.5% of the richest people in the EU paid just a small tax of 2%, we could get 213.3 BILLION euros a year. That is the equivalent of over 80% of our yearly energy bills. It’s the salaries of over 7 million teachers across Europe or an increase of 20% of the healthcare spending. So instead of having CEOs lecture us about how we need to drop our coffees to be able to afford a home, how about we start making the economy a bit more fair by making those who have the most contribute their fair share?

Sadly, even if it’s common sense, not everyone is willing to prioritise the livelihoods and wellbeing of the majority. Even when the cost of living crisis and inflation rates were at their worst, a coalition of conservatives, far right and liberals voted against a call to have fair taxation systems to protect the most vulnerable during times of crises.

We need fair economic rules

And the reason why there will continue to be a dire lack of public investment is because of the economic straitjacket the EU has put upon itself and all the national governments. Despite the clear failures of the old economic models of deficit and debt limits, the revised EU economic governance rules obey these outdated dogmas, entrenching them even further in what promises to be a harsher round of austerity than we have ever seen before.

This happened because the greens and left were clearly outnumbered by the mainstream political groups, who, with the support of the Socialist and Democrats, had a wide majority to approve this disastrous reform, despite the warnings from economists and trade unionists about the negative impact this would have on our economies, our investment capacity, and our essential services.

Things have to change. We need new economic rules, ones that are fit for the future that we all deserve, ones that put people and planet at the forefront, ones that are made to last and not lurch from crisis into crisis. 

To achieve a fair economy we must raise our voices and stand together. We need to achieve an economy that works for us: young people, working families, small businesses. We need to build an economy that works for the people and the planet, not one that sides with billionaires and multinationals, whilst leaving everyone else unprotected.

This means:

  • Taxing capital and shares at the same or higher rate than work.
  • Taxing billionaires.
  • Having more transparency so that no one can hide their wealth in tax havens.
  • Investing public money in the pillars of our societies and our public sector.
  • Investing public money to fight the climate emergency.

A Green and Social Europe is possible. Even if it seems like the world is crumbling down. And it’s hard to stay hopeful when groceries have quadrupled, our rents are increasing every month and we need therapy that we can’t afford. Our hours are spent juggling precarious jobs and leaving little room for the things that truly matter. This storm we’re facing is not just about bills and budgets; it’s about our dreams, about our mental health, about our future.

Now take a second to imagine a better Europe

… where governments work hard so that people can thrive and live a good, comfortable life without struggling. A Europe where we are supported to do our best for ourselves and the planet. Yes, imagine a Europe whose strength lies not only in its economic prowess but also in the wellbeing of its people.

We already know that companies are making more profits than ever, so how are we expected to believe that there is no money available to invest in our people and in our public services?

A Europe without precarity is possible.
And as Greens/EFA we are fighting for it.

We have been calling for:

1. Homes for people, not for profit

Let’s start with not having to spend such a big part of your salary on rent. It’s possible, and in 5 steps we could make sure that everyone has a decent, affordable and warm home.

2. And end to unpaid internships

Now, let’s add some workers’ rights, and make sure that all young people get paid for their internships! If you work, you get paid, as simple as that!

3. A Europe where everyone can pay their bills

What about unpaid work, people who have to stop working to look after their relatives or raise a family? Or people who can only work part-time because they have other, more important, things to do? With a minimum income to keep everyone above the poverty line, we would be able to do more for others and spend less time slaving away for faceless corporations.

How can we deliver this?

Well, it’s all about prioritising. What do YOU prioritise? Well-being, thriving communities, a care economy that works? Or weapons, “competitiveness” (whatever that means!) and record-breaking wealth and profits in the hands of a tiny few?

As Greens/EFA we have always voted in favour of people over profit at European level.

We don’t just talk, we act. When the European Parliament voted on the need for a minimum income to keep everyone in Europe above the poverty line, we secured a majority despite opposition from some groups. Here’s how political groups voted on this key issue:

Voting behaviour – support to European directive on minimum income

The result was similar when we pushed to tackle speculation in the housing market. We secured a majority but some were against action. Even though speculation drives up house prices and makes it impossible for people to live where they want to. Speculation in the housing market means that people with money can buy up properties and resell them for a higher price, making it harder for us to afford anything.

Here you can see how political groups voted on this key issue:

Voting behaviour – countering speculative investment

If, like us, you also want people’s wellbeing to be at the front and centre of our policies, we just need to shift the priorities and take measures to stop the excessive accumulation of wealth in the hands of a tiny minority and to focus on delivering prosperity for all. We want to thrive, not just survive!

If you want a Green and Social Europe, sign up here for one of our posters.

Circular tech economy

Eco-design and right to repair

Let’s face it: we all love our tech! That’s why, when our phone or favourite appliance breaks, we don’t want to be forced to throw it away and have to spend loads of money on a new one. We want to be able to repair it, replace broken parts, maybe even recycle it into something new. We want a circular economy that creates tons of green jobs. The future is already in the making, and it’s here to stay!

In our highly connected world dominated by smartphones, computers, and electric vehicles, there’s a harsh reality hidden behind the glossy screens: the cobalt powering our rechargeable batteries. Its extraction often exacts a heavy toll on both people and the environment. Because some (huge) companies prioritise profits over the well-being of people and the planet. They exploit workers, waste energy and natural resources, and design products so that they break fast and quickly become obsolete. These companies even make it harder to repair and reuse their tech – on purpose – to get higher profit margins. This abuse has to stop!

We commissioned a study on the environmental impacts of digital technologies. It assesses the impact of our digital tech on the planet. It proposes specific measures to tackle premature obsolescence, reduce digital waste and ensure greater transparency and consumer protection.

We have worked hard to raise awareness about the destructive greed of these companies, which abuse workers, exploit the planet, and rip off consumers. Thousands of people have signed our petition on the right to repair:

We all love our tech and we couldn’t live without it. But as we marvel at the wonders of technology, let’s not forget the people behind the gadgets, who sacrifice their lives for our convenience. We have created a Comic leaflet to explain these issues in a visual way. Please share it if you also want a better economy that is not built on the backs of the oppressed.

cartoon image / repair

Our call to action is a reminder that our quest for progress must be accompanied by accountability and transparency. This is why we’ve been calling for mandatory labelling on products and an end to premature obsolescence.

The Greens/EFA are dedicated to shaping a future where technology’s marvels aren’t tainted by human and environmental exploitation. We want to foster innovation alongside responsibility. This is why we’ve vigorously advocated for Right to Repair legislation (read our open letter here signed by MEPs and hundreds of associations) and ecodesign regulations. In a throwaway culture, these new laws will champion sustainability and social justice. They will heralding a new era where European-made products endure and consumers hold the power to fix, reuse, and recycle.

By championing the right to repair and eco-design, we endorse durability, fair labour practices, and a new economic model. Rejecting exploitation, we cultivate a culture of repairability and sustainable production.

Our campaigning efforts have borne fruit! Both the new laws on right to repair and eco-design set to be implemented by 2026. These laws will create tons of green jobs in the repair, reuse, and recycling sectors, offering a beacon of hope for a brighter future.

The other thing we have worked hard to tackle is “greenwashing” – false claims by companies that their products are sustainable. This has now been banned across the EU so that consumers won’t be lied to any more!

The Greens/EFA Group has been championing the green economy, circularity and green jobs as our vision of the future – a world in which we all win: the planet, the workers and the small business owners. In our “Green Jobs leaflet” we gathered examples and proposals of future-proof work that pays well and protects the planet at the same time.

Together, we can construct a world where sustainability and social responsibility guides every design-decision. It’s a future where products aren’t mere possessions, but symbols of our commitment to a better world: for ourselves, future generations, and the health of our planet.

For a free, feminist and equal Europe

A Feminist, Free, and Equal Europe isn’t a dream

It’s a mission we’re actively pursuing, and we need your help to make it a reality.

Our goal is simple yet ambitious: 

To create a world where everyone has the fundamental right to live without fear of violence and where everyone has autonomy over their bodies and lives. 

We are building a society where people of all gender identities, expressions and sexual orientations can authentically be themselves, free from discrimination or persecution.

But conservative, far-right, and even some liberal forces across Europe are obstructing our path to progress. 

These dangerous opponents seek to roll back the rights we’ve fought so hard to secure. From Italy to Poland to Hungary, they push policies that force people into carrying unwanted pregnancies. They deny access to vital abortion and gender affirming care, and perpetuate harm against the LGBTIQ+ community.

However, the unity and resilience of feminist and LGBTQ+ movements across Europe are stronger than ever. From grassroots activism to advocacy in the European Parliament, we’re tirelessly working to safeguard our freedoms. 

To achieve our vision, we drive change by:

  • Rising up against gender-based violence: Leading efforts to recognise gender-based violence as a European crime, advocating for cyberviolence awareness, and pushing for resolutions addressing #MeToo. We’re proud to have played a leading role in the EU’s adoption of the first-ever directive on gender-based violence,  and the EU’s ratification of the Istanbul Convention.
  • Protecting sexual and reproductive rights: Defending abortion rights and sexual and reproductive health is central to our mission. This is why we are actively campaigning for abortion to be enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. We are and relentlessly working to end the forced sterilisation of women and girls with disabilities. 
  • Eradicating structural inequalities: Defending economic justice through the equal pay directive, and feminist leadership through the women on boards directive.
  • Being relentless on defending LGBTQ+ rights: From advocating for the EU to be recognized as an “LGBTIQ Freedom Zone” to defending the rights of rainbow families in Italy, calling for the universal decriminalisation of homosexuality and transgender identity, to fighting for the rights of intersex people, we’re committed to do all we can for the equality and freedom of LGBTIQ+ individuals both within and outside the EU.

But we can’t do this alone.

We are part of a diverse community of NGOs, human rights defenders, social movements, and green actors—all working together toward a shared vision.

Only through collective action can we transform the European Union into a true Union of Equality. 

Sign up today to be part of the movement for a feminist, free, and equal Europe!

Bring back nature

Nature is magic

We need to restore nature.

It is the basis for our existence. Without healthy ecosystems, there is no drinkable water, no clean air and no fertile soils.

Without nature, there is no farming. Without nature, there is no food. Without nature, we cannot withstand the impacts of climate change.

However, we are losing nature faster than ever. Globally, more than a million species are at risk. The extinction crisis threatens the very foundations of our economies and livelihoods.

Luckily, nature has an incredible capacity to bounce back. But it needs our active support.

We can bring back nature, and it is already happening in some places. Across the EU, people have successfully worked to restore our wetlands, forests, rivers and seas.

But a toxic coalition of conservatives, far right and some liberals is out to destroy nature, destroy farmers, and destroy our way of life.

They want to stop every effort to bring back nature. First, they tried to kill a new EU law to #RestoreNature. Now they are coming after existing EU nature laws.

We must stop them. We must defend nature and save our planet.

We successfully defended the nature restoration law – we will defend our other nature laws too. Read this article explaining why we need a nature restoration law.

Conservatives already have their next target in sight: they want to lower EU protections for key wildlife species like the wolf, bear and lynx. They say they worry about the wolf but in reality, they want to get rid of cranes, flamingos and bisons too, which have only just bounced back around Europe.  

Who wants to undermine wildlife conservation in the EU / restore nature

To defend nature, we must stand firm against all coordinated attacks and expand EU protections of nature, in line with the EU’s international commitments.

This means:

  • Effectively protect 30 percent of EU land and sea, and strictly protect 10 percent;  
  • Fully apply existing legislation, especially the EU’s Birds and Habitats Directives and Nature Restoration Law. Stop illegal culling of top predators and other infringements of EU nature laws;
  • Adapt farming, forestry and fishing practices to protect and restore nature also outside protected areas;
  • Ensure the EU budget provides sufficient funding for nature protection and restoration.

Stay up to date

Stop the EU-Mercosur trade deal

Our international trade should comply with our social and green values.

We do not want to contribute to deforestation, to the violations of indigenous peoples’ rights and to the use of toxic pesticides in third countries. We do not want to import food that contains dangerous pesticides and violates animal welfare standards. We want the EU to protect social rights and sustainable farming. 

Stop EU Mercosur photo action

The EU-Mercosur trade deal that has been in the making runs counter to all these goals. 

Instead, it will bolster the toxic agro-industry that is destroying the environment and violating human rights in the Mercosur countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay). The toxic trade deal threatens the Amazon forest and other precious biomes of Latin America that have already fallen victim to the land-grabbing of mega-farms. These forests and biomes have a regional and even global role to play in fighting climate change and biodiversity loss. The deal also threatens the indigenous people residing in these exceptional natural areas.

The agreement would also put in danger the sustainable farming model we are trying to put in place in the EU. It would bring unfair competition from products that do not have to comply with the same standards.

MEPs with anti mercosur agro protesters EU Mercosur

We want to stop this dinosaur deal from being concluded and ratified. We want to enhance cooperation with Mercosur countries in a way that supports human rights, sustainable development and our climate and biodiversity goals. We want cooperation that protects indigenous people, farmers, workers, consumers. Cooperation that is based on global justice and not just the interests of a handful of multinationals and their armies of paid lobbyists. Other alternatives exist. Read our study below to find out more:

Faced with farmers’ vocal opposition to this deal and to keep things quiet during EU elections, some EU leaders pretended negotiations were suspended. They are not, so let’s make some noise. 

The European Commission wants to conclude the negotiations on the deal as fast as possible. It also wants to put the ratification of the deal in the fast lane. It is very likely that only the European Parliament will have a say. This (il)legal trick is contrary to the mandate that was set for negotiations, according to which national parliaments should also agree to the deal. 

Today most of the Conservatives, liberals and socialists approve of this deal. Big lobbies, from the European car industry to pesticides producers, are pushing them to support it. 

Who wants to stop the EU Mercosur trade deal - Vote card

But we can still stop it. The mobilisation against this deal has stayed strong and as a result we’ve managed to avoid the signing of this deal throughout the whole 5-year mandate. With you, we will keep up the fight. Let’s stop the EU-Mercosur trade deal #StopEUMercosur

Protecting Privacy: Biometric Mass Surveillance and the AI Act

Our fight continues

Throughout the EU, governments are experimenting with highly intrusive systems of facial recognition and other biometric mass surveillance in public spaces. Biometric surveillance systems encompass not only remote biometric identification, but also emotion recognition and biometric categorisation; all undermine the core of fundamental rights in different ways. Their implementation can create a feeling of constant surveillance, give the parties deploying biometric identification a position of uncontrollable power, and indirectly dissuade the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights, such as our freedom of speech and of information, our rights to privacy, to a fair trial and to non-discrimination.

Thus, biometric surveillance is an enormous breach of our right to privacy. It happens without our consent and its effects are chilling. Technology that tracks us throughout public space should simply not exist in a democratic society, nor should technology that assumes that we are nervous or stressed based on its own assessment, or that assumes that we are ‘abnormal’ based on how we dress, look or act.

Greens/EFA MEPs Patrick BreyerSergey Lagodinsky and Kim van Sparrentak tell us why it is more important than ever to continue fighting for our right to privacy.

Fighting for your right to privacy

But in the face of this looming threat, there are voices of resistance. For years, civil society organizations and the Greens/EFA have been at the forefront of the fight against biometric mass surveillance, recognizing the threat of such technology to our fundamental values and democracy.

We led the campaign, organised hearings, workshops, and public conversations with experts, screened documentaries, developed a video game, and producied campaign materials. This includes a video on 5 things you need to know about BMS, screened in cinemas and on social media.

Greens/EFA event with the Reclaim Your Face campaign in the EP / Biometric Mass Surveillance
From left to right: MEPs Petar Vitanov, Karen Melchior, Birgit Sippel, Patrick Breyer, Konstantin Macher (NGO Digital Courage) at the Greens/EFA event with the Reclaim Your Face campaign in the EP.

Throughout our campaign, a strong collaboration with civil society was key to raising awareness and influence positions – we organised public events with shadows from other political groups, shared their articles and petitions  and supported the European Citizens’ Initiative.

The campaign went to Italy and Greece to see the deployment of biometric surveillance and commissioned a YouGov representative survey on the public opinion on this topic in 10 EU countries, a study on BMS in Member States and a mapping of biometric surveillance projects in the EU. Ahead of crucial votes in the European Parliament, the Greens/EFA also mobilised other political groups and brought attention to dangerous situations. For example, we called out the dangerous the situation in France, where mass surveillance was to be allowed during the Olympics and where, some months later, the illegal use of facial recognition was disclosed. They also raised concerns about Serbia, where new laws on biometric surveillance threaten democratic rights and freedoms. We fought hard in the negotiations on the AI Act to make a ban on mass surveillance part of the regulation. 

Allowing Real Time Facial Recognition / Biometric Mass Surveillance
During the vote on the AI Act in June 2023, Greens/EFA MEPs voted against allowing real time face recognition.

Our efforts have not gone unnoticed. In 2023, the European Parliament took a historic stand, calling for a full ban on biometric mass surveillance for law enforcement purposes. This landmark decision marked a significant victory for privacy advocates, but our work is far from over.

Indiscriminate surveillance of Europeans is a severe violation of everyone’s fundamental rights. This became part of the Parliaments position alongside with further regulation of AI technology.

After this, the negotiations on the AI Act started with the European Commission and the Member States (the so-called ‘trilogues’). Member States in the Council concluded negotiations in December 2023 and agreed to the text in February 2024. We expect the European Parliament to vote on it as early as March 2024.

Biometric Mass Surveillance: What about the bans?

The Greens/EFA negotiation team fought very hard to protect fundamental rights. We notably fought for a complete ban of real time biometric identification (best known as facial recognition) in public spaces throughout the trilogues.

Greens/EFA video screened in cinemas in Belgium to raise awareness about biometric mass surveillance.

Despite our best efforts, compromises had to be made during negotiations on the AI Act. While we pushed for a complete ban on real-time biometric identification in public spaces, we were met with resistance from Member States.

As a result, real time biometric facial recognition was banned except where several conditions are met. Among those conditions are requirements to request authorisation by a judicial or selected administrative authorities, a limitation of the use in time and location to what is necessary, fundamental rights impact assessment and registration of each use in a public database. The systems can only be used to search for specific persons, for example the suspects of specific criminal offences. However, in 2021 alone, more than 6,000 suspects of such offences were wanted by European Arrest Warrants issued by the judiciary.

As before the AI Act, it is for every Member State to decide whether to introduce real time remote biometric identification legislation. Any such national legislation will still have to comply with fundamental rights, which we believe prohibit biometric mass surveillance. Politically, however, some are concerned that the conditions set out in the AI Act will be used as an instruction manual and for legitimising the implementation of real time biometric identification schemes. They fear that the agreed conditions will make it politically difficult to continue generally opposing such schemes for their detrimental effects on our rights and our open society. Nevertheless, our position remains: regardless of the outcome of the AI Act we are determined to continue opposing such observation.

On remote biometric identification in post, that is based on recorded video data, the Greens/EFA first fought for a prohibition and later for very strict limitations but faced fierce opposition from Member States in the Council. As a compromise, while the technology is not banned, it will be listed as one of the high-risk AI use cases in Annex III and is therefore subject to the high-risk requirements. In addition, only a targeted search of a person will be possible and the documentation and logging of each use in police records, annual reports to market surveillance authorities and national data protection authorities will be required. Restricting of ex-post biometric identification to prosecution of serious crimes only, as desired by us, has regretfully not made it into the final AI Act text.

Due to our prolonged efforts, it has been clarified that Member States can introduce stricter conditions in both cases.

When it comes to emotion recognition and biometric categorisation practices, some use cases are banned in the final text following our pressure while others that we would have also liked to see there, are not (e.g. the police using questionable AI systems to predict who is or is not telling the truth).

Summing up: The fight to ban mass surveillance continues!  

While some countries and cities – such as France and Hamburg in Germany – have started to roll out real time behavioural mass surveillance of public spaces, there is so far no national legislation that brings real-time biometric identification (face surveillance) to Europe. Our group will continue to fight any such plans politically, regardless of their conformity with the AI Act. The chilling effect and discrimination of biometric mass surveillance are unacceptable to us. If national legislation allowing for real time remote biometric identification in public spaces is ever passed, it should be contested in court for violating our fundamental rights.

A strong civil society movement to keep our public spaces free from biometric mass surveillance is now as vital as ever. Our Group assures key initiatives such as the Reclaim Your Face movement our continued and unwavering support and determination.

Il est difficile de voir et de ressentir, par nous-mêmes, le déclin de la biodiversité dans la mer Méditerranée, mais c’est aussi une grande source de motivation pour protéger ce qui est encore là et faire revenir ce qui a été perdu. Les aires marines protégées, en particulier celles qui sont strictement protégées, ont montré qu’elles sont bénéfiques à la fois pour la nature et pour la petite pêche côtière. Pour Caroline Roose, députée européenne écologiste, nous devons mieux protéger ces zones pour vraiment protéger nos océans.

La Méditerranée est surexploitée. Pouvons-nous retrouver sa magie ?

J’ai toujours été très connectée à la mer Méditerranée. Enfant, je passais mon temps à m’y baigner et à discuter avec les pêcheurs du port dans lequel travaillait mon père. L’appel de la mer m’a poussé à devenir marin moi-même et à en épouser un.

En tant que députée européenne, je passe toujours le plus de temps possible dans et près de la mer. Pendant les week-ends, je fais de la plongée en apnée. C’est ma façon de me relaxer. C’est comme ça que j’ai pu voir de mes propres yeux le déclin de la biodiversité marine près des côtes des îles de Lérins. En moins de dix ans, les prairies sous-marines de posidonies, des plantes emblématiques de la biodiversité méditerranéenne, sont devenues marrons voire sont complètement mortes. Là où les yachts stationnent, le fond de la mer est aussi désert que le sol de la lune. Il y a de moins en moins de poulpes et d’oursins. Les mérous ont pratiquement disparu, je n’en croise plus qu’un et c’est toujours le même. De manière générale, il y a de moins en moins d’espèces et beaucoup moins de gros poissons.

Tout ça n’est pas surprenant quand on voit la pression que subit la vie marine en Méditerranée. Les problèmes les plus importants sont la surpêche, la pollution, le trafic maritime, l’urbanisation de la côte et la navigation de loisir. L’augmentation de la température de l’eau ainsi que de son acidité, qui sont liées au dérèglement climatique, jouent aussi un rôle important. Et cela ne touche pas que la Méditerranée. L’océan Atlantique, la Manche et la mer du Nord ne vont pas tellement mieux.

Calanques - Marseilles / CC0 T

Il y a de l’espoir : une protection efficace des mers permet de faire revenir la nature

Mon plus grand plaisir, c’est de visiter des endroits où, grâce à des efforts de conservation, la Méditerranée reprend vie. Dans des zones de conservations comme le Parc Marin de la Côte Bleue ou le cantonnement de pêche Cap Roux, que j’ai eu le privilège de visiter en tant que députée européenne, la biodiversité méditerranéenne a retrouvé toute sa splendeur. Ces sites sont d’une beauté à vous couper le souffle et écouter celles et ceux qui prennent soin d’eux est très inspirant. Il est encourageant d’entendre que la plus vieille réserve marine de France, à Cerbère-Banyuls, va bientôt être largement agrandie.

Ce que tous ces sites ont en commun, c’est d’avoir, à la fois, des aires strictement protégées et des zones moins protégées. Dans les aires strictement protégées, qui ne couvrent en général qu’une toute petite partie de la surface totale, la nature est laissée à elle-même. Les activités humaines qui perturbent la vie et les habitats marins, comme la pêche, l’exploitation minière, l’extraction de minerais, l’aquaculture ou la construction, n’y sont pas autorisées. Ces zones sont un refuge où les espèces peuvent se reposer, se nourrir, grandir et se reproduire en toute sécurité. Dans les autres zones, bien plus grandes, une partie de ces activités néfastes sont souvent encore autorisées.

Il est incroyable de voir comment la vie marine, lorsqu’elle est laissée en paix, récupère rapidement. Les études scientifiques confirment qu’à la fois le nombre et l’abondance d’espèces augmentent avec le temps. Nous devons juste donner à la nature l’espace et le temps pour récupérer et les beautés de la Méditerranée réapparaissent sous nos yeux.

C’est gagnant-gagnant : les pêcheurs et les habitant·es de la côte bénéficient de la conservation de la nature

Ce qui est le plus étonnant, c’est que les scientifiques ont noté que les populations de poissons augmentent, au bénéfice des pêcheurs locaux. Dans les aires strictement protégées, qu’on appelle aussi “réserves marines” ou “zones de non-prélèvement”, la quantité de poissons peut être multipliée par six par rapport aux zones non-protégées. Les pêcheurs en bénéficient car les populations de poissons qui se multiplient dans les aires protégées se déplacent ensuite hors de ces zones et dans les zones de pêche adjacentes.

Dans les aires moins protégées, certains types d’équipement de pêche sont, en général, interdits. Cela bénéficie aux pêcheurs qui utilisent des techniques de pêche à faible impact, en particulier, les petits pêcheurs. La petite pêche joue un rôle essentiel dans la vie des communautés côtières et dans l’économie locale. Nous devons tout faire pour assurer leur avenir. La mise en place d’aires marines protégées bien gérées peut stimuler la transition vers une pêche à faible impact, en particulier quand les pêcheurs y sont associés dès le départ.

Caroline collecting waste in the seabed
Caroline collecting waste in the seabed

À Côte Bleue et Cap Roux, les pêcheurs ont été associés aux efforts de conservation dès le départ. Au début, les discussions ont été tendues, mais, avec le temps, les bienfaits ont été visibles de toutes et ou avec l’augmentation des populations, de la diversité et de la taille des poissons. Le plus difficile, dans les deux cas, a été trouver les financements pour faire respecter les restrictions de pêche, en particulier auprès des pêcheurs de loisir.

“C’est gagnant-gagnant”, a déclaré Patrick Bozonnat, l’ancien premier prud’homme de la Prud’homie de pêche de Martigues, quand je lui ai demandé ce qu’il pensait de la zone de non-pêche de Côte Bleue. Quand je leur ai demandé quels problèmes ils rencontraient, les pêcheurs de Côte Bleue ont parlé de la navigation de plaisance, de la pêche de loisir et du braconnage, pas du fait qu’ils ne pouvaient pas pêcher où ils voulaient.

Christian Decugis, premier prud’homme de la Prud’homie de Saint Raphaël, dit la même chose de la zone de non-prélèvement de Cap Roux, qui a été mise en place par les pêcheurs professionnels eux-mêmes pour protéger et augmenter les stocks de poissons. À Banyuls, où certains pêcheurs étaient très opposés à l’installation d’une zone de non prélèvement au début des années 70, les pêcheurs demandent, aujourd’hui, qu’elle soit agrandie. Bientôt, la zone interdite à la pêche fera 16km2 contre 6,5 actuellement.

Trop peu, trop tard – les objectifs de protection européens et mondiaux sont hors d’atteinte

Bien que les bienfaits pour la biodiversité et pour l’économie locale soient prouvés et que les pêcheurs aient des expériences positives, la surface d’aires marines protégées est encore bien loin de ce qu’il faudrait.

Aux niveaux international et européen, les gouvernements se sont engagés à protéger, d’ici 2030, 30% des océans. Au niveau européen, nous voulons que 10 % de nos eaux soient strictement protégées. Ces objectifs sont basés sur la science, mais nous sommes bien loin de les atteindre.

L’Agence européenne pour l’environnement (AEE) estime que l’Union européenne n’atteindra probablement pas ses objectifs pour 2030. Pour y arriver, il faudrait “accélérer de 30% le rythme” de création d’aires marines protégées. Actuellement, seuls 12% des eaux européennes sont protégées et moins de 1% sont strictement protégées.

Nous avons besoin de véritables aires marines protégées et pas seulement sur le papier

Mon pays, la France, est un champion quand il s’agit de désigner des aires marines protégées. 60 % de la partie de la Méditerranée qui est sous juridiction française est couverte d’aires marines protégées. Dans le reste des eaux françaises, dans l’océan atlantique, la Manche et la mer du Nord, on en a 40 %. La France a donc déjà atteint son objectif de 30 %. Mais qu’en est-il en pratique ?

Selon les scientifiques, seuls 0,1 % de la Méditerranée française et moins de 0,01 % des autres eaux françaises sont strictement protégées. La grande majorité des aires marines protégées ne méritent pas l’appellation “protégées”.

Et la France n’est pas la seule. Partout en Europe, les aires marines ne sont souvent protégées que sur le papier et la biodiversité continue à être détruite parce que les mesures de protection sont insuffisantes. Dans beaucoup d’endroits, les entreprises ont toujours le droit d’extraire du sable ou du pétrole brut dans les aires protégées. D’immenses bateaux de pêche continuent à racler les fonds marins avec des filets lestés. Avec cette technique, appelée “chalutage de fond”, les pêcheurs attrapent des juvéniles et des espèces rares et causent de graves dégâts aux fonds marins. Et cette technique est, malheureusement, très utilisée dans les aires marines protégées européennes.

Tant que ces activités seront autorisées, la vie marine ne peut pas se restaurer et le terme “aire marine protégée” ne sera rien d’autre que du green washing. En effet, l’Union internationale pour la conservation de la nature (UICN) explique clairement que les activités industrielles et le développement d’infrastructures (exploitation minière, pêche industrielle, extraction de pétrole ou de gaz, par exemple) sont incompatibles avec la protection marine. Les lois européennes existantes (comme la directive Habitat) devraient empêcher cela dans certaines zones, mais nos gouvernements ont choisi d’ignorer la loi !

En février 2023, la Commission européenne a enfin demandé aux gouvernements européens de sorti  progressivement du chalutage de fond dans les aires protégées. Vous me direz que c’est du bon sens, mais nos gouvernements préfèrent faire croire aux pêcheurs que tout va pour le mieux et qu’il ne faut rien changer, alors même que le déclin des populations de poissons est visible de tous.

Nos océans ne peuvent plus attendre – nous devons agir ensemble, et vite

La Cour des comptes européenne l’a rendu officiel : l’action de l’Union européenne est, jusqu’ici, insuffisante pour permettre aux écosystèmes et aux habitats dégradés de récupérer.

Mais des océans en bonne santé sont indispensables pour la vie sur Terre. Ils nous sont très utiles, notamment pour pouvoir continuer à pêcher et pour préserver les moyens de subsistance des communautés de pêcheurs. Nous en avons aussi besoin pour réguler le climat et pour nous adapter aux effets du dérèglement climatique.

On dit souvent que l’Amazone est le poumon de la planète. C’est vrai. Mais n’oublions pas que les océans sont encore plus importants pour le climat. Ils absorbent plus d’un quart des émissions de gaz à effet de serre.

Nous devons cesser de nous leurrer : nos océans sont en mauvais état. Nous devons agir et accompagner nos pêcheurs dans la transition progressive et planifiée d’une pêche industrielle vers une pêche à faible impact qui sera bénéfique tant pour la nature que pour les communautés locales. Nous devons mettre fin à la surpêche et assurer un avenir à nos écosystèmes et à nos pêcheurs.

Sans écosystèmes sains, il n’y a pas de poisson. Et sans poisson, il n’y a pas de pêcheur.

Fisher on the port of Marseilles / CC0 nguyen-dang-hoang-nhu

Stay up to date

No Nature, No Fish – Why we need marine protected areas to help fish and fisheries

It is hard to see and feel, with your own senses, the decline of Mediterranean biodiversity. But it is also a great motivation to protect what is still there, and to bring back what has been lost. Marine protected areas, and in particular strictly protected areas, have been shown to benefit both nature and small-scale coastal fisheries. We need more and better protected zones to effectively protect our oceans, argues Greens/EFA MEP Caroline Roose.

The overexploited Mediterranean Sea – can we bring back its magic?

I have always been closely connected to the Mediterranean Sea. As a child, I spent my time swimming in it and talking to the fishers in the port where my father was working. The call of the sea led me to become a sailor myself, and to marry a sailor too.

As an MEP, I still spend as much time as possible in and around the sea. During weekends, I go apnea diving. That is how I relax. It is also how I have seen, with my own eyes, the decline of marine wildlife before the coast of the Lérins Islands. Over the last decade or so, Posidonia seagrass meadows have turned brown or died off completely. In places where many yachts anchor, the seabed is barren like the moon. There are fewer octopuses and sea urchins. The grouper fish has all but disappeared, I only see one around and it is always the same. There are fewer species altogether, and much less large-sized fish.

None of that is a surprise, considering the pressures our precious Mediterranean wildlife is exposed to. The most important issues are overfishing, pollution, marine traffic, coastal development and pleasure boating. Rising water temperatures and acidity linked to climate change also play a major role. The Mediterranean is not alone in that – the Atlantic Ocean, The English Channel and North Sea are not doing much better.

Calanques - Marseilles / CC0 T

There is hope: Effective marine protection works to bring back nature

My biggest pleasure is to visit places where, thanks to marine conservation efforts, the Mediterranean flourishes with life. Long-standing nature conservation areas like Cote Bleue or Cap Roux, that I have had the privilege to see as an MEP, display our Mediterranean wildlife in all its magnificent splendour. These sites are just breath-taking, and talking to those taking care of them is such an inspiration. It is encouraging to hear that France’s oldest marine reserve at Cerbère-Banyuls is soon to be massively expanded.

All these sites have in common that they include both strictly protected and less regulated areas. In the strictly protected areas, which usually cover a tiny fraction of the total area, nature is practically left to itself. Human activities that disturb marine life and habitats, like fishing, mining, mineral extraction, aquaculture or construction, are not allowed there. These places act as a refuge where species can rest, feed, grow and reproduce safely. In the remaining – much bigger – part of the protected areas harmful activities are often still allowed.

It is amazing to see how marine life, when left alone, bounces back quickly. Scientific studies confirm that both the number and abundance of species increase over time. We just need to give nature the space and time to recover, and the wonders of the Mediterranean reappear before our eyes!

Win-Win Situation: Fishers and coastal communities benefit from effective nature conservation

Perhaps more surprisingly, scientists also document that populations of popular fish species grow, to the benefit of local fishers. In strictly protected areas, also called ‘marine reserves’ or ‘no take zones’, the abundance of fish can multiply up to six times, compared to unprotected waters. Fishers benefit from the so-called ‘spillover effect’ by which fish populations that recover inside protected areas move outside these areas and into nearby fishing grounds.

In less regulated areas, certain types of fishing gear are usually prohibited. This benefits fishers using low-impact techniques, notably small-scale fishers. Small-scale fisheries play a vital role in supporting the livelihood of coastal communities and local economies. We need to do everything we can to secure their future. The establishment of marine protected areas can help to stimulate the transition towards low-impact fishing, especially when fishers are involved from the start.

Caroline collecting waste in the seabed
Caroline collecting waste in the seabed

At Côte Bleue and Cap Roux, fishers have been involved in the conservation efforts from the start. At the beginning, they had heated discussions. Over time, however, the benefits became obvious to all, as the abundance, diversity and size of the fish increased. What has been difficult in both areas is to find the financial resources to enforce the fishing restrictions, especially on recreational fishers. 

“It’s a win-win,” Patrick Bozonnat, a former head of the local fishers’ community, or ‘prud’homme’, of Martigues, quipped when I asked him about the ‘no take zone’ at Cote Bleue. When I asked about their problems, the fishers at Cote Bleue named pleasure boating, recreational fishing and poaching – not the fact that they cannot fish wherever they want. 

Christian Decugis, the prud’homme of Saint Raphael, confirms this for the ‘no take zone’ at Cap Roux, a measure installed by the professional fishers themselves to protect and enhance fish stocks. In Banyuls, where some fishers were strongly opposed to the installation of a ‘no take zone’ in the early 1970s, fishers are now asking to expand it. Soon, the area closed off to fishing will cover 16 instead of 6.5km2.

Too little too late – EU and global marine protection targets remain out of reach

Despite the conclusive evidence of benefits for biodiversity and local economies, and fishers’ positive experiences, we are still a long shot from where we need to be in terms of marine protected areas.

Globally and in the EU, our governments have pledged to protect, by 2030, 30 percent of our oceans. In the EU, we also want to place 10 percent of our waters under strict protection. These targets are based on solid science, but we are nowhere near reaching them.

The European Environmental Agency (EEA) estimates that the EU may not reach its 2030 targets. It says “the pace will have to increase by almost 30%” to achieve that. Currently, we are at 12 percent protected areas, and less than 1 percent of the EU’s seas are strictly protected.

We need real marine protection instead of paper parks

My country, France, is one of the EU’s champions in designating protected areas. Sixty percent of the Mediterranean Sea that is under French jurisdiction is covered by marine protected areas. In the remaining French waters, in the Atlantic Ocean, in the English Channel and in the North Sea, this is 40 percent. So France has already achieved the 30 percent target. But what does that mean in practice?

According to scientists, only 0.1 percent of the French Mediterranean, and less than 0.01 percent of the other waters, are strictly protected. The vast majority of marine protected areas don’t deserve the qualification ‘protected’.   

France is not alone in this. Across Europe, marine protected areas are often ‘paper parks’. They are protected only on paper and biodiversity continues to be damaged, because the protective measures are insufficient.  In many places, companies are still allowed to extract sand or crude oil in protected areas. Large fishing vessels can drag weighted nets across the seabed. With this technique, called “bottom trawling”, fishers catch young fish and fish belonging to sensitive species, and inflict massive harm on the seabed. That is not an exception but quite common in Europe’s marine protected areas.

So long as such activities are allowed, marine life cannot recover, and the term ‘marine protected areas’ is just greenwashing. Indeed, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) explicitly states that industrial activity and infrastructure development (e.g. mining, industrial fishing, oil and gas extraction) are not compatible with marine protection. Existing EU law (the EU’s Habitats Directive) should prevent such abuses. But our governments choose to ignore the law, and get away with that!

In February 2023, the European Commission finally asked EU governments to phase out bottom trawling in protected areas. That is nothing but common sense, you would think. But our governments prefer to mislead fishers into thinking that all is well and nothing needs to change, even though the decline in fish populations is obvious to all

Our oceans cannot wait – we need to act together, urgently

The European Court of Auditors has made it official: EU action has been insufficient so far to allow for the recovery of marine ecosystems and degraded habitats.

But healthy oceans are indispensable for life on Earth. We need them for many reasons, notably to be able to still catch fish in the future and to safeguard the livelihood of our fishing communities. We need them to regulate the global climate, and to be able to adapt to the effects of climate change.

It is often said that the Amazon is the lungs of the earth. It is true. But let’s not forget that the oceans are even more important for our climate. They absorb more than a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions!

We can no longer delude ourselves about the state of our oceans. We need to act, and accompany our fishers in the transition from industrial towards low-impact fisheries that benefit both nature and local communities. We need to end overfishing and secure the future of our ecosystems and fisheries. 

Without healthy ecosystems, there are no fish. And without fish, there are no fishers.

Fisher on the port of Marseilles / CC0 nguyen-dang-hoang-nhu

Stay up to date

The EU-Mercosur deal would be a setback for people and planet – let’s put it in the past

When you’re in the supermarket, do you check if your chocolate or coffee is fair trade? To many of us, it matters where our food comes from and we want to make sustainable choices. This could become increasingly difficult under the EU-Mercosur trade deal, which puts social rights and the protection of the rainforest at risk.

As we enter 2024, it is time to move on from the unfair and unsustainable trade deal that the EU has been pursuing with Mercosur countries. We want a forward-looking partnership on sustainability that puts social rights and environmental goals before short-sighted economic profits. Let’s put the people and the planet first, both in Europe and Mercosur partner countries.

What is the EU-Mercosur trade deal?

The EU-Mercosur deal is a trade agreement between the European Union and Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay – collectively known as the Mercosur countries. Negotiated since 1999, it was finalised in 2019, but has not yet been ratified by the European Parliament or the 27 EU Member States. The deal will increase agricultural imports from Mercosur to the EU, intensifying deforestation. The deal will also increase EU exports, including cars, car parts, machinery, chemicals including pesticides, and pharmacological products to Mercosur countries.

The deal has proven to be controversial. Activists, civil society and experts have sounded the alarm about the possible ramifications for the environment and human rights. The European Ombudsman criticised the European Commission for not finalising the sustainability assessment on the EU-Mercosur deal before concluding negotiations. Nonetheless, the European Commission remains eager to ratify the deal as swiftly as possible.

A dinosaur deal in times of climate emergency

For now 25 years citizens, civil society and experts have been mobilising against this deal, be it in Europe or Latin America. Because this deal would increase deforestation and the destruction of some of our planet’s most unique and crucial ecosystems, like the Amazon. While COP 28 re-iterated the call to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030, the world is failing on this pledge and the EU and Mercosur need to do their part. Nature and the climate are in crisis, and this deal would strike another blow.

Concerns about the deal are wide-spread. In a study commissioned by the Greens/EFA group, more than 46% of business leaders said they were concerned about its environmental impacts, and 49% said they were in favour of legally binding environmental protections in the agreement, including sanctions.

“Time to call off this deal. Free-traders have been pushing desperately but the mobilisation for the environment and social rights has worked and the Commission has been unable to sign the deal this autumn. We will keep up the fight to ensure EU leaders do not put environmental and social concerns under the carpet to sign this deal against public opinion and public interest in the EU and in the Mercosur countries themselves.”

SASKIA BRICMONT MEP

Protecting social rights on both sides of the ocean

From Indigenous people protecting nature to farmers working hard to shift to sustainable ways of farming, this deal would put multinationals and short-sighted economic profits before social rights and human rights. Why? It would increase Indigenous land-confiscation and unfair competition against sustainable farming. On top of that, the deal jeopardises working conditions and jobs. It also risks aggravating gender inequality and will favour multinationals over local SMEs.

Promoting sustainable ways of farming and food safety

In Brazil alone, over 500 pesticides are permitted, 150 of which are prohibited in the EU. Instead of a deal that imports food containing these pesticides in Europe, we need to help partner countries phase them out to improve food safety. That includes the EU stopping exporting pesticides banned in the internal market to Mercosur countries. Animal welfare is also at stake: improving farming conditions for livestock in Europe should not be undermined by the EU closing its eyes on imports.

Partnering with Mercosur countries for sustainable development

Mercosur countries and their people are our equal partners. Rather than exploiting them and damaging their environment, we need to pursue sustainable development hand in hand. Rather than a trade deal that does not have enforceable sustainability provisions, we need to support them in reaching sustainable development goals, cooperate on sustainable trade and stop exporting goods to them that we deem damaging for our own health and environment.

“We need to prioritise sustainability, and work with our Mercosur partners, especially progressive leaders like Brazilian President Lula, to find an alternative way of cooperating and strengthening our relationship. We cannot accept a trade agreement with no enforceable deforestation mechanism, to protect the Amazon and other ecosystems of major importance for the planet”.

– ANNA CAVAZZINI MEP

Close menu