Lecornu Rejects Accusation of Deception in Dispute Over Agriculture Law

Paris – 21/07/2026: French Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu has sharply attacked Green parliamentary group leader Cyrielle Chatelain in a dispute over the new law on protecting and securing agriculture. Chatelain had challenged the government over the exemptions for certain plant protection products provided for in the law. Lecornu accused the environmentalists of fueling public dissatisfaction with misleading claims.

The conflict follows the final vote in the National Assembly on July 20. Parliament adopted the compromise text produced by the joint committee after the government and Senate had previously considered different versions. The process was launched in April under an expedited legislative procedure. The text combines measures concerning agricultural production, water resources, land protection, trade relations and administrative simplification.

Particularly controversial are provisions intended to allow national exemptions for plant protection products under narrowly defined conditions. Supporters point to production losses, a lack of alternatives and competitive disadvantages compared with imports. They place the measure within the framework of food sovereignty, which Lecornu has declared a central political objective of his government. According to his account, France should not subject its farmers to stricter requirements than competing producers outside the country.

The Ecologiste et Social parliamentary group, by contrast, sees this as a setback for environmental and health protection. Chatelain criticized the fact that the law once again opens access to products whose risks to pollinators, waterways and human health have been the subject of scientific and political controversy for years. For the Greens, the exemption provision is emblematic of an agricultural policy course that places short-term yield interests above reducing dependence on pesticides.

Lecornu denied that the government was pursuing a general return to banned products. His response also targeted the political interpretation of the law: the opposition was concealing the fact that the bill was intended to strengthen controls against unfair competition and legally limit their use. The prime minister is thus seeking to shift the conflict away from a fundamental environmental issue toward the specific supply situation and the protection of farm incomes.

The dispute reveals a structural divide in French agricultural policy. Since the farmers’ protests, the government has been under pressure to give greater consideration to costs, regulation and international competition. Environmental groups and left-wing parties, meanwhile, warn that national relaxations could undermine European protection standards. The legislative text has been adopted by parliament, but the drafting of implementing provisions and possible legal reviews remain decisive before it enters into force.

For Lecornu, the dispute is also politically sensitive at home. The government must appeal to rural voters without placing further strain on its climate policy. The Greens, meanwhile, link the pesticide dispute to their demand for an ecological transformation of agriculture. The provision is therefore likely to remain a focal point in relations between the government, agricultural associations and the environmental opposition beyond the summer.