Unfortunately, recourseism is sometimes done to the detriment

Good afternoon, dear colleagues, minister.

I will try to be brief. I want to say some things to remind you of the past, because here it appears from the debates that the minister governed or was a minister for about five years, because when we ask for the elimination of bureaucracy and how much it is bad and it is said here that for you something is going to be done badly to the Czech farmer, so I just have to remind you that it does not give me that dear colleagues who spoke before me here are already kicking to the minister here, that they could have changed the situation eight years ago. And the fact that in the situation in which we find ourselves here, of course, it is an important part of the heritage that we take care of.

But to be objective, I must also remind you that the bill that is here was certainly not created for three months, the minister will confirm this, but rather for three quarters of a year. This means that it is still largely the work of the former management of the Ministry of Agriculture. And a number of those things – and again I have to say objectively – the bill responds to the pest situation that we had here in the last Parliament, and we had a higher level than ever. It was not only a vole, but also bees, wolves, wild boar and others that we will have to deal with, I hope the hunting law soon or at least this year will fix the situation.

Here the bill responds to the vole and other situations that we have in the Czech Republic in this area. Unfortunately that probably won’t work, you know, those who have been working professionally for a long time, it’s not possible to draw a thick line between the jurisdiction of the ministry of health and the jurisdiction of the ministry of agriculture, it’s going to always cross. And we, who were on the Agriculture Committee during the last election, were united in what we wanted from the Department of the Environment. But the Ministry of the Environment has taken a completely different approach, so I’ll just remind you that the debate is never and never will be completely straightforward.

It was possible to react to the overpopulation of voles much more quickly, much more efficiently, I am firmly convinced of that, but the Ministry of the Environment did not want it. My colleague Oborná will certainly confirm this, although she criticizes here the Minister of Agriculture, how he has already prepared for it, for having definitely understood. Well, he couldn’t invent it, because we know the law of competence and we know that it is based on communication between the different departments, and that appealism is sometimes unfortunately to the detriment. In our case, in the case of the Phytosanitary Law, it belongs to the third ministry, and it is the Ministry of Health.

And I confirm what my colleague Kott and my colleague Pražák said here. There is really a problem in the use of these individual products, because the Czech Republic is a small market in the field of fruits and vegetables, and the development of these products in Europe is progressing, some producers and producers of these new products are not worth realizing in the Czech market and the greengrocers rightly draw our attention to the fact that we are losing competitiveness because of our certification process – and I think the Minister of agriculture hears this and I hope the Minister of Health or our colleagues in the Health Committee, because they should also hear – that our certification process, which each manufacturer must follow for these individual products, is expensive and time-consuming, and that this handicaps Czech food producers in the field of fruit and vegetables, and we should do something together, although I do not like it at this moment, we have not yet discussed the first reading of the law, we are already discussing if we have an amendment ready.

No, I think that we would devote as much of the debate as is going now, over the next few weeks, to whether we can do something now, whether we are able to work with colleagues on the health committee, with the Ministry of health and, if necessary, with the Ministry of the Environment agreed on some of the changes, which I note have bothered us in the past, because we have all spoken about it with the former Minister of the Environment – we, then the opposition, you the coalition, and we were in no way able to force the Ministry of the Environment to react, as we would have imagined. But the Minister of the Environment saw things differently last time.

That’s why I want to say here that the border is not a thick line, there will always be possibilities if, and in the end the natural person who will have jurisdiction in the given place decides, if it is of a nature and landscape protection authority or a ministry of agriculture or someone else defined.

Otherwise, I would like to point out that it is really a problem with these products that we should work together to find that the certification process and the use of these products – here they must be certified in Germany, in strong countries, on the European Union’s agricultural plan – we just got the product and we allowed our fruit growers and greengrocers to use it, because unfortunately, due to our legislation and the price it costs, it doesn’t pay off just not. If we want to do something about it, we have to work together and I would be almost convinced that the problem will not be the minister of agriculture, I mean the ministry of agriculture, but rather the ministry of health, because the certification process concerns them in particular and their skills. Thank you for your attention and I hope to conclude. After all, we will have time for a professional debate between first, second and third reading.

Thank you for your attention.

Leave a Comment