- Palm industry still waiting on FAQs, Guidelines after MSP meeting this week
- New EUDR Committee meets in Brussels, with no detail released
- Why does the Commission insist EUDR is “on schedule”?
Palm and other commodity exporters are still waiting on the promised guidelines and updated FAQ document from the European Commission. As little as two weeks ago, Commission officials promised an updated FAQ document “next week”, and promised the official implementation guidelines “very soon”.
Neither have appeared, even after the regulation’s principal consultation body for the regulation — the Multistakeholder Stakeholder Platform on Deforestation (MSP) met on Tuesday this week.
That meeting was expected to produce, at the very least, an update of the FAQ document, but seemed to produce precisely nothing other than a massive backlash from European industries.
The day after the meeting, a group of no less than 28 European industry groups — including COPA-COGECA, Europe’s largest farm lobby — issued a statement calling for a delay to the regulation. It states:
“It is crucial that the European Commission and Members States acknowledge that the set timeline is simply not feasible. Therefore, we demand immediate action to delay the EUDR’s entry into force and that the necessary compliance tools are fully provided with sufficient time to prepare adequately.”
However, it’s also apparent that the Commission isn’t sitting on its hands; it is seeking a clear way out of the EUDR mess. Immediately following the MSP meeting — in the same room — the first meeting of the EUDR Committee took place. This was a closed-door meeting, with only Member States and the Commission represented. On the agenda was an update on the ‘Implementing Acts’ that are part of the regulation. These are critical; without the implementing acts, member state governments can’t actually enforce the rules.
For palm exporters and importers of any commodity, this isn’t helpful. The big question that should have been answered was where guidelines are.
The Missing Guidelines
What has become apparent during POM’s conversations over the past month is that consultation with European industry on the EUDR Guidelines — and the EUDR more broadly — has been close to non-existent.
The Commission has reportedly said two things to stakeholders, which appear to be untrue.
The first is that it has been consulting with stakeholders on the Guidelines. However, some of Europe’s largest industry groups have reported that there has been no consultation process, nor any direct consultation approaches on the Guidelines. This is a massive red flag, given that it’s industry that needs to comply. If the Commission doesn’t know what’s actually feasible, how can it be writing the guidance?
The second is that the Commission has said to stakeholders on various occasions that the Guidelines are complete, and their publication is just a matter of legal process. However, we were informed earlier this month by a reliable source that they are “still being worked on.”
Why does the Commission that EUDR is “on schedule”?
This week, for example, at the WTO Agriculture Committee meeting, Commission representatives stated there are no plans to delay implementation, despite significant protests from Indonesia, India, Australia, the US and others. This needs to be understood within the context of the EU’s bureaucratic structures: until the Commission gets official word that policy — which is set by Commissioners — has changed, they will continue with the orders they have, and repeat the talking points that have been approved.
Outside of Europe, it’s difficult to grasp how seriously the delay is being taken, and its political intricacies are. Contrast the Commission’s comments with Commission President Von der Leyen’s comments to the European People’s Party that a “solution” would be provided soon. This indicates two things: first, it’s on the President’s radar; second, it’s a big enough problem that she’s had to tell her own party that she’ll do something about it.
The President is currently juggling political priorities. She needs her nominated Commissioners confirmed in their hearings at the beginning of November, and for that she needs support from the Parliament and its committees. The EUDR will be a flashpoint at the confirmation hearing. The EPP and other aligned parties will be seeking assurances of change; others, particularly the Greens, will be seeking confirmation of the status quo.
The President is a smart politician. There is little doubt that she has engineered a solution that will align with her priorities for the next five years: improving competitiveness and streamlining regulations.
However, we are unlikely to know what that solution looks like until after the confirmation hearings in November.