Vienna (PK) – In order to be able to respond better to extraordinary crises in the future, the Agriculture Committee today voted, with the votes of ÖVP, SPÖ and NEOS, in favor of adapting the Food Management Act (LMBG). This will include, among other things, an expansion of precautionary measures, in particular through the possible stockpiling of food by regulation in the future.
For Agriculture Minister Norbert Totschnig, the amendment to the LMBG is implementing the lessons of the past few years so that we are better prepared for future crises. While the members of the governing parties agreed with this view, the FPÖ and the Greens still need to talk in order to achieve the necessary two-thirds majority in the National Council.
All parliamentary groups supported a government proposal that provides for an adjustment to the agreement between the federal government and the state of Burgenland on the preservation and further development of the Neusiedler See-Seewinkel National Park.
The MPs also discussed the evaluation concept presented by the Minister of Agriculture for the domestic CAP strategic plan 2023-2027. The first results are expected from the end of 2026. The report was accepted by the majority of all parliamentary groups except the FPÖ.
The amendment to the Food Management Act is intended to improve precautions in the event of a crisis
Table of Contents
In response to the experience gained from the crises of recent years – such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russian war of aggression on Ukraine or supply chain problems – the Food Management Act (LMBG) is to be adjusted (297 dB). This regulates the management of various product groups in the food sector in the event of a crisis and enables appropriate measures to be taken. The LMBG, together with the Supply Security and Energy Control Act, thus forms the framework for dealing with extraordinary crises. According to the government proposal, the corresponding measures should be activated by issuing regulations in the event of a crisis. The amendment is scheduled to apply from the beginning of 2026 and expire at the end of 2035. The constitutionally necessary two-thirds majority is required for a resolution.
In particular, the expansion of precautionary measures should enable strategic stockpiling of food, according to the explanations of the LMBG amendment. To increase crisis resilience, the adaptation also provides information measures for the population. Furthermore, better use of data is planned to assess the necessity and targetedness as well as to evaluate various measures. With an amendment submitted in the committee, the government groups state that precautionary measures should also take into account the preservation of food sovereignty. In addition, a storage regulation issued in the event of a crisis should in no way result in storage costs that were previously borne privately for goods that are available in sufficient quantities being subsequently financed by the state.
Agriculture Minister Norbert Totschnig stated in the committee that the amendment to the LMBG is implementing the lessons of the past few years so that we are better prepared for future crises. The legal framework for stockpiling strengthens the state’s precautionary measures in the event of a crisis. It is basically an enabling law, whereby the exact storage is determined by regulation depending on the crisis.
Debate in committee
The minister’s remarks were joined by the ÖVP mandates Klaus Lindinger and Georg Strasser. The aim is to ensure that the population is supplied with food in times of crisis, said Lindinger. Committee chairman Strasser spoke of “excellent work” involving all key stakeholders and all political groups. Based on the experience of the last five years, an amendment to the LMBG has become necessary.
For Elisabeth Feichtinger (SPÖ), it is about a timetable to be able to react to future crises. There were good and constructive discussions with the opposition factions.
The FPÖ MPs saw it more differently. Peter Schmiedlechner identified “some ambiguities”. Although there were positive discussions between the parliamentary groups, the proposed law was formulated “very vaguely”, which is why more exchange is needed for this “two-thirds matter”. In addition, it makes sense to wait for the crisis strategy plan (as part of the Resilience of Critical Facilities Act) to be presented by the Ministry of the Interior by January 17, 2026 at the latest before making a “hasty decision,” said the FPÖ mandate.
Alois Kainz and Albert Royer (both FPÖ), who were interested in coordination between the agriculture and interior ministries, agreed with this. Manuel Pfeifer (FPÖ) addressed the Court of Auditors’ statement on the LMBG, which criticized the fact that the government proposal did not contain any further information on how public stocks should be kept.
In order to achieve the necessary two-thirds majority, Olga Voglauer (Greens) expects the opposition to be “involved at eye level”. For example, the amendment request was submitted late. The Green MP also asked about the assumed scenarios for the storage of pesticides and fertilizers. Since these products are dependent on supply chains and politically uncertain states, stockpiling must be considered, answered an expert from the agriculture department.
Karin Doppelbauer (NEOS) was surprised at the criticism from the opposition factions. She advocated submitting a list of the outstanding points, especially for the FPÖ.
Evaluation concept of the Austrian CAP strategic plan 2023-2027
In addition, the report presented by the Minister of Agriculture on the evaluation of the domestic CAP strategic plan 2023 to 2027 (GSP 23-27) was on the agenda of the Agriculture Committee. It describes the evaluation concept and the schedule for assessing the effects of the strategic plan, which bundles a total of 100 interventions with a funding volume of around €9.5 billion (III-232 dB).
According to the Minister of Agriculture, a total of three evaluation phases are planned: An ex-ante evaluation that has already been carried out to review the SWOT analysis and the intervention logic, an implementation evaluation including an impact forecast in the period from 2026 to mid-2028 and an ex-post evaluation after the end of the CAP period from 2023 to 2027 including an impact assessment by the end of 2031. With regard to the CAP strategic plan According to the report, 2024 was the first full implementation year from 2023 to 2027, but was characterized by global crises, volatile markets and extreme weather events, thus making the framework conditions more difficult. The first quantitative evaluation results are expected from the end of 2026, said Totschnig.
Olga Voglauer (Greens) said she would have expected more from the report. Although this explains what evaluation means, it offers little in the way of evaluation. The next report must look different, said the Green Party representative.
Karin Doppelbauer (NEOS) had a similar view, as she called for an earlier evaluation of the findings from the current CAP period.
Johannes Schmuckenschlager (ÖVP) emphasized that the report is important for the further development of the coming CAP period.
Peter Schmielechner (FPÖ) argued completely differently. The evaluation plan shows “the clear failure of the ÖVP”. Instead of “pointless evaluation,” what is needed are “measures to combat the daily farm deaths.” By closing businesses every day, “the numbers would be on the table,” said Schmielechner.
The Agriculture Minister told Petra Tanzler (SPÖ) that the issue of equality between women and men was both a separate evaluation topic and a general cross-sectional topic of the entire CAP strategic plan.
Adaptation of the federal-state agreement on the Neusiedler See-Seewinkel National Park
The adjustment of the agreement between the federal government and the state of Burgenland on the preservation and further development of the Neusiedler See-Seewinkel National Park, which was established in 1993, is intended, among other things, to implement the recommendations of the Court of Auditors. Specifically, this concerns the adaptation of the national park areas to the current status as well as the restructuring of committees and bodies of the national park. The permanent representation of the federal government on the board should be established and this board should be reorganized, as the Minister of Agriculture emphasized in the committee. Further changes affect the Scientific Advisory Board and the National Park Forum. In addition, there should be clear regulations regarding the financing of the national park company and adapted to the common practice of Austrian national park companies. There are no plans to change the equal funding of the federal and state governments, according to the explanations of the government proposal (291 dB).
For Andreas Kühberger (ÖVP), it is about modernization and technical adaptation that will bring more clarity to the tasks of the national park company. The interests of agriculture would also be taken into account.
Peter Schmiedlechner (FPÖ) emphasized that more control, transparency and lean structures make sense and are worth supporting. (Continuation of the Agriculture Committee) med
