News Nitrogen Debate
Revised Natura2000 leads to disagreement in the Chamber
The emergency measure taken by the government to review the status of some Natura2000 areas caused a great deal of controversy in the nitrogen debate on Thursday 14 November. "When we present that in Brussels, we will be laughed at, aren't we?" said Frank Futselaar (SP).
The cabinet presented November 13 a package of emergency measures to reduce nitrogen emissions. It states, among other things, that the status of a number of small Natura 2000 areas will be reviewed. However, this measure cannot count on everyone's support. "We are already the worst boy in the class when it comes to nature conservation, so we can't report in Brussels that we want to remove the Natura2000 status from various areas?" This question is asked by both Futselaar and Esther Ouwehand (Party for the Animals).
'No other choice'
Tjeerd de Groot (D66) also shares this opinion, but thinks that he will deal with this when the measures to improve and strengthen nature are presented at the same time. According to Jesse Klaver (GroenLinks), however, the project developers will use this measure in the longer term to convert these nature reserves. "The quality of those nature reserves will decrease sharply. That is an excellent argument for project developers to place industry or homes there in a few years, for example."
Although there is much criticism of the revision of the Nature Conservation Act, there is no other solution, according to Mark Harbers (VVD). "Measures are now needed. There are nature reserves in the Netherlands that can no longer be saved. We must therefore dare to make the decision to drop them." Geert Wilders (PVV) and Jaco Geurts (CDA) also support the reclassification of Natura2000 areas. Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Minister Carola Schouten (Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality) agree with Harbers' reasoning. "If a nature reserve cannot recover, then we should not continue. We will make this clear to the European Commission," said Rutte.
VVD and Rutte under fire
It is not only the measure to revise the Nature Conservation Act that is under fire. Many parties see the VDD, and in particular Prime Minister Mark Rutte, as the cause of the nitrogen problem. "Rutte himself indicates that this is the biggest crisis he has experienced in his period as Prime Minister, but he must realize that he caused this. He is the one who did not take the blinders off when it became clear that the PAS was unsustainable. He knowingly continued to emit nitrogen," said Klaver. Futselaar also wonders why it had to take so long before Rutte came up with a first reaction. "We had insufficient information to give a solid answer," Rutte claims.
This is contradicted by Geert Wilders (Party for Freedom). "In the Netherlands we do not have a nitrogen problem, but a 'Rutte problem'. Rutte does not see coming when things threaten to go wrong and then hides under chairs or benches if things actually go wrong. VVD now blindly follows the policy of GroenLinks. I therefore want to congratulate Jesse Klaver, because apparently he has become Prime Minister. After all, the VVD is taking over the entire plan." Wilders's dissatisfaction eventually resulted in a vote of no confidence against the Prime Minister. It was later rejected, however.
'Look at Germany'
Thierry Baudet (Forum for Democracy) also thinks that we are looking completely wrong at the ruling of the Council of State. "As I stated earlier, I believe that there is no nitrogen problem at all. The air quality in the Netherlands is better than ever before. The problem arose because the Council of State has criticized the way in which permits are granted. in our country. Not because we exceed the standards. However, because the cabinet did nothing at the time, that is now the case and various sectors are at a loss."
In addition, Baudet reports that he does not agree with the package of measures that is currently available. "We have to look at Germany. We have to raise the standards." Wilders also took the same position at the beginning of the debate. "Air quality in the Netherlands has increased, as has water quality and biodiversity. This is mainly due to the good work of our farmers. We should not restrict ourselves, but raise our standards for nitrogen. That is why I would like to point out again the emergency law that we have proposed. The cabinet then has six months to get to work on this." Rutte is clear about Baudet and Wilders' proposals. This is not possible."
Provide clarity
Klaver is also concerned about the fact that the emergency measures do not refer to air traffic. "It is unfair that farmers are being raised while we are still planning to open Lelystad Airport." On the other hand, this does not mean that Klaver now suddenly has sympathy for the farmers, because he still supports the opinion of Tjeerd de Groot (D66) to halve the livestock. "I just wonder when De Groot will take steps."
Agriculture Minister Schouten does not comment on a decline in livestock, but refers in particular to existing programs. "We are already doing well in the field of feed, manure and soil, including reviewing the manure policy, which we will discuss shortly, and low-nitrogen feed." Schouten will announce later how the space created will return to agriculture.
Kimberly Baker
© 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.
