On 12 May 2026, the European Parliament published amendments to the proposed regulation on the production and marketing of forest reproductive material (FRM), tabled by the Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN) group. The amendments seek to insert critical language into the recitals, challenging the alignment of the FRM rules with the European Green Deal and broader EU sustainability objectives. If adopted, the changes would force the regulation to acknowledge alleged negative consequences such as increased bureaucratic burden, EU interference in national forest policy, weakening of rural economic activity, and loss of agricultural competitiveness.
The amendments, submitted by MEP Milan Uhrík on behalf of the ESN group, target two recitals of the legislative text. Amendment 2 addresses the recital referencing OECD Scheme updates and policy priorities, though its text appears identical to the original, suggesting a technical or procedural correction. Amendment 3 is the more consequential change: it adds a critical clause to the recital referencing the European Green Deal and Regulation 2021/1119 (the European Climate Law). After the sentence stating that the Green Deal aims to transform the EU economy for a more sustainable future, the amendment inserts a clause listing the alleged harms: "although the evident consequences such as increasing the bureaucratic burden, interference of the EU to national forest policy, weakening the rural economic activity, loss of agricultural competitiveness."
No other political groups (EPP, S&D, Renew, Greens/EFA, ECR, Left) have submitted amendments to these recitals, indicating broad support for the Commission's original text or a decision not to contest these provisions at this stage. The ESN amendments thus represent a minority, oppositional view rather than a consensus. The document is an amendment to the Parliament's second-reading recommendation (A10-0136/2026) on the file, which follows the Council's first-reading position adopted on 17 December 2025.
Policy orientations and trade-offs
The ESN amendments reflect a cleavage between EU-level environmental integration and national sovereignty over forest policy. The original Commission proposal, aligned with the Green Deal, aims to modernise FRM rules to improve forest resilience, climate adaptation, and biodiversity. The ESN critique argues that this alignment imposes disproportionate costs on Member States and rural economies. The trade-off is between potentially stronger EU-wide environmental standards and the autonomy of national forest management, with implications for administrative burden and competitiveness.
Impact on stakeholders
If adopted, the amendments would primarily affect EU regulatory bodies and national authorities by embedding a critical narrative in the legal text, potentially complicating implementation. EU forest owners and nurseries could see reduced regulatory pressure if the critical language leads to a more cautious application of Green Deal objectives. However, the amendments are unlikely to pass without broader support, so the practical impact is minimal. The main impact is political: the ESN group signals its opposition to the Green Deal's application to forestry, which may influence future debates.
Expected institutional follow-up
The amendments will be considered in the Parliament's plenary vote on the second-reading recommendation. Given the lack of support from other groups, they are unlikely to be adopted. The file will then proceed to trilogue negotiations with the Council and Commission, where the final text will be agreed. The Council's position, adopted in December 2025, already reflects compromises between Member States.