In a written answer on 4 August 2026, European Commissioner for Climate Action Wopke Hoekstra defended the EU's climate policy against concerns that it is undermining the competitiveness of European agriculture and the fertiliser sector. Responding to a parliamentary question from Polish MEP Piotr Müller (ECR), Hoekstra pointed to the impact assessment accompanying the revision of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) Directive, which he said analysed carbon leakage risks and support for industrial decarbonisation. He also outlined existing funding instruments for biogas and digestate development, including Cohesion Funds, the Common Agricultural Policy, and the InvestEU programme, and highlighted the Fertilisers Action Plan as a comprehensive package to support domestic production and innovation.
The answer comes amid growing pressure from farmers and some member states over rising energy and fertiliser costs, which they attribute partly to EU climate regulation. Müller's question specifically asked what impact assessment the Commission had carried out on the effect of climate policy on fertiliser competitiveness and farm costs, what financial instruments would support biogas plants and digestate use, and how the Commission would prevent further reductions in European fertiliser production. Hoekstra's response did not announce new measures but instead pointed to existing tools and assessments, reiterating commitments already made under the Fertilisers Action Plan and the ETS revision.
Hoekstra's answer reflects a policy orientation that seeks to balance decarbonisation with competitiveness, arguing that the transition can be managed through existing support mechanisms. However, critics may note that the response lacks concrete new financial commitments or specific targets for biogas expansion, instead relying on member states' use of existing funds. The Commission's position suggests it sees the Fertilisers Action Plan as the primary vehicle for addressing sector concerns, with a focus on low-carbon and circular solutions.
Stakeholders are likely to have mixed reactions. EU farmers and fertiliser producers may welcome the recognition of their challenges but could be disappointed by the absence of new, dedicated funding. Member states with significant agricultural sectors may push for more tailored support, while environmental groups may see the response as a positive reaffirmation of climate goals. The European Parliament could follow up with further scrutiny, particularly on the implementation of the Fertilisers Action Plan and the effectiveness of the cited funding instruments. The Commission's next steps will likely involve monitoring member state uptake of available funds and reporting on the plan's progress, with any new legislative proposals expected only if gaps emerge.