Finland’s stance on the EU restoration regulation has been fluctuating. Initially, they voted “no,” then abstained from voting, and now their position is “no” again. Member of Parliament Eveliina Heinäluoma questions the Finnish government’s handling of this issue, especially as they are now planning to tighten their position on the regulation.
The restoration regulation aims to impose binding obligations to improve the state of nature in various habitats, sparking intense debate in Finland. Despite Finland’s initial opposition to the proposal last summer, the regulation narrowly passed the Council of Member States. Subsequently, a political agreement was reached in November, adding flexibilities to the regulation to lower costs and give member countries more control over restoration efforts.
However, in a surprising turn of events, Hungary changed its vote from a yes to a no in the second round of voting on the regulation. Currently, the EU presidency is trying to secure enough votes to pass the regulation, but Finland has decided to maintain its position against it.
Minister of Environment Kai Mykkänen views this situation as “unsatisfactory” and emphasizes the need for consistency in EU decision-making. He believes that Finland should have supported the amended version of the regulation, given that it included important flexibilities for member states.
Heinäluoma agrees with Mykkänen and calls for consistency in Finland’s stance on the restoration regulation. She believes that promoting environmental initiatives is crucial for long-term benefits and draws parallels with past directives that have had positive impacts on nature conservation.
In conclusion, while Finland has been vocal in its opposition to the EU restoration regulation initially, they have since maintained their stance despite changes made by other member states. As such, it remains unclear whether or not they will ultimately support this important environmental initiative aimed at improving biodiversity across Europe.
