NC-BC Raises Alarm Over Budget Provision Endangering Banana Farmers’ Future

On December 12, 2023, in a significant move for agricultural stakeholders, Luis Campos, the parliamentary spokesperson for Nueva Canarias-Bloque Canarista (NC-bc), publicly announced a dissenting vote against a contentious provision included in the 2026 budget. This announcement was made during a press conference held in Santa Cruz de Tenerife, where Campos articulated serious concerns regarding the implications of the provision for banana farmers in La Palma.

Violation of EU Regulations Sparks Outrage

Campos specifically referred to the provision labeled as additional provision 46 bis, which he argues is in direct violation of European Union (EU) law. He emphasized that this provision neglects to secure a vital report from the General Directorate of European Affairs, a critical step necessary for ensuring compliance with EU regulations. The absence of this report raises significant legal questions regarding the provision’s validity and its potential repercussions.

The implications of this oversight are profound, particularly for the more than 5,000 banana farmers in La Palma. Campos warned that these farmers could face the daunting prospect of having to repay grants they have already received, placing their financial stability at serious risk. He underscored the precarious situation these farmers find themselves in due to the government’s decision to include such a provision in the budget, which he described as reckless and irresponsible.

Official Registration of Dissenting Vote

Following the announcement, Campos indicated that the dissenting vote would be officially registered on the upcoming Monday. This action comes after the Chamber’s Board denied NC-bc’s request for a legal assessment concerning the amendment related to banana subsidies. Campos expressed his disappointment over the Board’s ruling, which claimed it lacked the authority to provide legal reports on amendments included in legislative proposals. This decision has left many questioning the transparency and accountability of the legislative process.

Despite this setback, Campos affirmed that NC-bc is entitled to submit a dissenting vote under Article 136 of the Regulations. He stated that this vote would be vigorously defended during the plenary session scheduled for the following Tuesday, just prior to the final vote on the budget. This determination reflects NC-bc’s commitment to advocating for the interests of banana farmers and ensuring that their voices are heard in the legislative arena.

Potential Consequences for Farmers

In his statements, Campos reiterated that the rationale behind the dissenting vote is grounded in the same legal concerns that were highlighted in the rejected request for a legal assessment. He pointed out that additional provision 46 bis fundamentally contradicts EU regulations governing state aid, raising alarms about its legality and the potential fallout for farmers.

He criticized the maneuvering by the cabinet led by Clavijo, which is supported by various political factions, asserting that their actions not only breach EU guidelines but also jeopardize the livelihoods of banana farmers in La Palma. Campos cautioned that while farmers may currently receive payments, they face the substantial risk of having to return these subsidies with interest if the European Commission determines that EU regulations have been violated. This scenario could lead to devastating financial consequences for many families dependent on banana farming.

Campos’s commitment to protecting the interests of banana farmers is evident in his assertion that NC-bc’s actions are aimed at safeguarding their legal and asset security. He expressed a firm stance against allowing farmers to be placed in a vulnerable position for the sake of politically motivated measures that contradict European law. This dedication to the farmers’ welfare underscores the importance of adhering to established legal frameworks in agricultural policy.

Furthermore, Campos highlighted that the controversial measure was introduced through an amendment rather than being included in the main legislative text. He believes this tactic was employed to circumvent the mandatory legal evaluations from relevant EU bodies, raising ethical concerns about the legislative process. This approach has sparked outrage among agricultural advocates who fear that it undermines the integrity of public aid regulations.

Additionally, Campos pointed out that a subsequent amendment from the same political factions sought to eliminate the requirement for a compatibility report with EU competition laws, as mandated by decree 100/1999. He characterized this move as an unprecedented attempt to undermine the controls that ensure public aid adheres to EU standards, labeling it a dangerous and illegal approach for farmers. Such actions could set a troubling precedent for future agricultural policies and their alignment with EU regulations.

Key points

• NC-bc submitted a dissenting vote against a budget provision violating EU law.
• Additional provision 46 bis threatens over 5,000 banana farmers in La Palma.
• The dissenting vote will be registered after the Board rejected a legal report request.
• Campos emphasized the risks of having to repay subsidies if EU regulations are not followed.
• NC-bc aims to protect the legal and financial security of banana farmers.
• The controversial provision was introduced through an amendment to avoid legal scrutiny.
• There are concerns about eliminating mandatory compatibility reports with EU laws.