Is agricultural vision becoming an agricultural hallucination?

The budget of the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality was the subject of a political debate on Wednesday 31 October. Everyone is enthusiastic about Minister Schouten's agricultural vision, but at the same time everyone sees something different in it.

The agricultural spokespersons of virtually all political parties shed their light on Minister Schouten's proposals. Nobody really notices that Forum for Democracy, Think and 50Plus are absent. These parties do not put any energy into the Schouten department. The debate is predictable, but there are still some interesting points to report.

Clubhouse
Tjeerd de Groot (D66) invites everyone to his clubhouse. He is pleased with the agricultural vision and notes that there is sufficient support to get started with the concrete measures. According to D66, circular agriculture has 4 pillars: animal feed that does not compete with human food, no rotting but ripening manure, feeding the soil and combating food waste. He sees the Netherlands as one large mixed company that can dispose of all manure on its own land.

De Groot argues for 1 standard that the farmer must meet, instead of the various standards that are currently being imposed. He is referring to standards for nitrogen, phosphate and ammonia. He realizes that developing this is an enormous task, but thinks that the clarity that this provides is important for farmers. Jaco Geurts (CDA) then suggested a kind of score, in which the farmer is free to score better on one subject than on another; provided the final grade is sufficient.

It was striking that De Groot argues in favor of looking beyond institutes such as Wageningen University and Research and TNO when it comes to advising government policy.

Finally, De Groot drew attention to innovation through chain concepts and expressed his disbelief that the farmer's wife who introduced Hamletz had to come up with a logo herself. "These kinds of concepts need to be introduced professionally," he said. "That has to be supported."

Animal Prosecutor
The speaking time of the PVV was used by Barry Madlener and Dion Graus. Graus mainly speaks on the subject of animal welfare and his passion for this subject translates into a stream of ideas: for example, he wants an animal prosecutor and animal rights must be incorporated into the constitution and criminal law. He also wants professional bans and continues to be an advocate for the animal police.

Madlener believes that the ministry should recognize liability for its own errors in files such as fraud with the Identification and Registration System (I&R) and fipronil. Madlener also believes that a good solution must be found for the pinches in the phosphate file. Geurts also has an opinion about this. He expressed his disappointment that his efforts did not lead to a solution for the problems.

PVV versus CDA and VVD
The compassion that the PVV showed led to Geurts lashing out: "The PVV always votes for the motions of the Party of the Animals (PvdD) that make farming almost impossible. They are crocodile tears from the PVV." Both Geurts and Helma Lodders (VVD) spend some of their permitted interruptions to the PVV.

Esther Ouwehand (PvdD) largely lost her interruptions to Lodders: the VVD is clearly a thorn in her side. Lodders, for example, had to respond to a letter from 1996, in which a passer-by was held responsible for beating piglets against the wall. Lodders distanced himself from that accusation. VVD supports the vision on circular agriculture and sees a role for innovation in this. Lodders would like to see the minister come up with an implementation vision for the agricultural vision.

Carla Dik-Faber (ChristenUnie) herself wrote a memorandum about the connection between the farmer and the citizen, which was submitted during the debate. Dik-Faber is committed to multifunctional agriculture and considers food waste to be an important theme: she would like to get rid of the rules about the size and shape of fruit and vegetables.

Hallucination
All parties support the minister's vision, but some fear an empty shell. Laura Bromet (GroenLinks) thinks it is special that so many parties support the vision, she fears that everyone will read what suits him or her. For GroenLinks, the vision means fewer animals. William Moorlag (PvdA) and Frank Futselaar (SP) also translate the vision into a smaller livestock. 

Futselaar is pleased that Minister Schouten finds Dutch food production unsustainable. And so everyone gets what suits them from the vision and there is a real chance that Moorlag's fears will come true: that the agricultural vision will become an agricultural hallucination.

© DCA Market Intelligence. This market information is subject to copyright. It is not permitted to reproduce, distribute, disseminate or make the content available to third parties for compensation, in any form, without the express written permission of DCA Market Intelligence.