Drafted on 19 July, updated on 2 August 2026
Copa-Cogeca’s lobbying has defended foie gras, fur, the use of pesticides (including glyphosate and neonicotinoids (*)) and the culling of wildlife (e.g. wolves).
It has done everything in its power to prevent measures that would tighten standards on emissions from livestock farms – exempting cattle farmers – and the phasing out of the use of cages for hens and other animals.
The same approach was used to defend public funding for the promotion of red and processed meat. When the Commission proposed excluding these products from programmes aligned with the European Cancer Plan, Copa-Cogeca engaged with certain Commissioners, wine and spirits organisations, and national associations. The restrictions were first watered down and then dropped altogether. The comment recorded in the internal documents is succinct: “The lobbying has paid off”
(*) How the lobby scuppered the pesticides reform
One of the main objectives of the European Farm to Fork strategy was to reduce the use and risk of chemical pesticides by 50 per cent by 2030. The new regulation was intended to turn this political objective into a concrete obligation. According to minutes cited byThe Guardian, during a meeting in September 2022, representatives of Copa-Cogeca openly discussed the possibility of dragging out the negotiations until the 2024 European elections, counting on the arrival of a Parliament and a Commission less favourable to environmental policies.
The strategy involved requesting new impact assessments, challenging the institutions’ studies and presenting governments with privately commissioned research on the economic effects of reducing pesticide use. The stated aim in the documents was to “force the Commission to abandon its objectives”. The tactic worked. The proposed regulation on the sustainable use of pesticides was withdrawn by the Commission in February 2024, a few months before the European elections.
The outcome is even more significant today. In December 2025, the Commission proposed that many active substances, following their initial assessment, could be authorised without a pre-set expiry date, thereby eliminating the automatic periodic review for the vast majority of pesticides. Brussels argues that the system would allow resources to be focused on emerging risks; scientists and environmental organisations, however, fear that substances could remain on the market for decades without systematic re-evaluation.
Glyphosate and neonicotinoids
The documents also reveal the pressure exerted to renew the authorisation for glyphosate. In a 2022 memo, the Copa-Cogeca secretariat urged its member organisations to lobby the permanent representations of Member States in Brussels to support the renewal. In November 2023, after governments had failed to secure a qualified majority either in favour or against, the Commission renewed the authorisation for glyphosate for a further ten years, until 15 December 2033. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies it as ‘probably carcinogenic’, whilst EFSA and ECHA have not identified any grounds to prevent renewal under the conditions laid down by the European Union.
Grilled’s full report adds a detail regarding neonicotinoids, substances known for their adverse effects on pollinators. In response to the European ‘Save Bees and Farmers’ initiative, backed by over a million citizens, Copa-Cogeca drew up a document to demonstrate that farmers were already taking sufficient measures and that stricter controls were therefore unnecessary. The document was described internally as ‘a good lobbying tool’. However, one delegate pointed out that it risked conveying a misleading impression, suggesting that the decline in pollinators could be resolved by farmers without further intervention or public funding…
The farmers’ short-sighted view is set out in this article: it is an apocalypse; the crisis affecting bees and other pollinating insects is already putting the livelihoods of 2 billion people at risk
