“The ideal would be for mediation to be sufficient,” argues the MP and farmer who carries the text

“Whether they are agricultural, industrial, even sporting, all existing activities would be reinforced” with this law, explains the rapporteur of the text, Nicole Le Peih, Renaissance deputy for Morbihan.

A bill arrives Monday, December 4 at the National Assembly relating to neighborhood abuses. The text intends in particular to regulate the phenomenon of complaints against agricultural operators from residents disturbed by the crowing of roosters or the smells of a stable. A minor phenomenon – 500 legal proceedings underway in France – but which is developing with the arrival of those called “neorurals” in the countryside, and has led to convictions of farmers.

The text provides for limiting appeals by considering that the history of economic activities must be taken into account. “Whether agricultural, industrial, even sporting, all existing activities would be reinforced“, explains the elected representative of the bill, Nicole Le Peih, Renaissance deputy for Morbihan.

franceinfo: is there really a need for a law for such a restricted phenomenon?

Nicole Le Peih: Ideally, mediation would be sufficient. But when you see today a sometimes systematic recourse to justice to be able to resolve a neighborhood problem, we really need this PPL which, by its title, is there to regulate neighborhood problems. Until now, it was case law, therefore not anchored in the Civil Code. We are therefore asking for an exception which is the anteriority of the activity: whether agricultural, industrial, even sporting, all activities already existing, that is to say where the existence of the economic activity was there before the complainant initiates proceedings, are reinforced. It must be emphasized that this is in accordance with the regulations. We will open up to development, but while respecting the legislation.

So this is not giving farmers a free hand and allowing them to build where they want?

Precisely, if you look at the environmental code, it is undoubtedly the one which is the most restrictive and the most drastic – and I weigh my words carefully as a farmer – to be followed. If you don’t have permission, you can’t move forward. So these authorizations are necessary to be able to preserve the anteriority.

A neighbor who complains, for example, about pollution or spreading too close to his home will still be able to file a complaint with this law?

We are not going to change the constitutional code, so appeal is still possible. But on the other hand, today you are aware, when you buy land, when you buy a house, of the existing price, of the “pre-occupation” of the territory. In Morbihan, there is a rather interesting experience which could be duplicated. The prefect at the time, with the chamber of notaries, had established a document for each purchase of land, for each purchase of a house: the person was aware of all the economic actors in the area around their purchase. So, somewhere, it is knowledge of the territory where it will arrive, of all the economic activities where it will arrive and it is a responsibility that it has and an awareness taken into account.