National farmers' protest is chaotic

Jan Veltkamp 18 December 2019

This is in response to it Boerenbusiness article:
[url=http://www.boerenbusiness.nl/ artikel/10885080/landelijk-boerenprotest-kent-chaotisch-verloop]Landelijk farmer's protest has a chaotic course[/url]

This demonstration today is certainly as valuable as the previous one. Last night a provisional agreement was reached as a sop. Only and only because they thought they could put the farmers and construction industry to sleep again. This massive action today shows that this is no longer possible. The fact that even massive farmers from Germany and last week in Ireland and France are taking part will also (perhaps and slowly) realize in Brussels that it is serious. Keep it up and don't get discouraged.

antoinette 18 December 2019

A profession that is provoked to the extreme by politics and the media is resisting.
Fortunately with the support of the builders and the citizens.
I think the farmers are great.

hosternokke 18 December 2019

Don't listen to us ?Will it be dry bread at Christmas after all !!!!

??? !!! 18 December 2019

hosternokke wrote:

Don't listen to us ?Will it be dry bread at Christmas after all !!!!

where then should one get the bread from; water!!!

hospitals except!

Arie 18 December 2019

Hopefully the government will intervene quickly. I completely miss the sense of reality among the protesting farmers, it is time for change and reduction of the number of farms in the Netherlands by at least 80%! Not willingly, then badly. These disruptive protests are only justified if there is no good buyout/buy out. For the time being, however, it is only a question of 'the nitrogen plans must be off the table'. The government should not give in to that, we have a climate problem and (among other things) the surplus of farms must be dealt with by force.

Subscriber

scarf 81 18 December 2019

Arie

If you don't even know how a cycle works.
And 100 other things you forget before that 80% farmer is gone
Then don't react like that

Hank 59 18 December 2019

Arie

If you want 80% fewer farmers, you also have to reduce the number of flight movements in the Netherlands by 80% and allow 80% fewer asylum seekers. Equal monks, equal hoods.

until here and no further 18 December 2019

Arie rages just like that, if he had knowledge he would say, if you work you are the l?l in the Netherlands

Geertje 18 December 2019

As a citizen I have enjoyed this chaos and Arie please don't make such stupid statements, delve into the matter.

jan4072 18 December 2019

@Arie, If farmers destroy all nature with their chickens, pigs and cows, why does nature just happen to be where most of the stables are located? Look at Groningen, nothing no stables but also nothing no nature. And all the know-it-alls in the Randstad who know so well? How is it possible that there is so little nature there? The nitrogen affair is one big bullshit / puppet show. But expand Schiphol. Aircraft above 1 meters do not count. And then be surprised that the ice in Greenland is melting. Could it be that it is due to the blanket of smog that thousands of planes a day dock high in the sky and maximize the greenhouse effect there? Maybe you've thought about that?

Janus of the tall Dirk 18 December 2019

yes Arie, a little compassion is allowed, hey.
it has often been the case in the past that what you spill today, you often come up short tomorrow.

Karel 18 December 2019

These are no longer farmers, but brain-dead wage slaves.
Hopeless action, grasping and unmasking predators from The Hague.

HARD, ARGESTIVE AND REGRESSIVE.

After slurry tank, diesel should be dumped in The Hague's Binnenhof.
This is the only language that recognizes our reigning disease.

arable farmer 18 December 2019

ari wrote:

Hopefully the government will intervene quickly. I completely miss the sense of reality among the protesting farmers, it is time for change and reduction of the number of farms in the Netherlands by at least 80%! Not willingly, then badly. These disruptive protests are only justified if there is no good buyout/buy out. For the time being, however, it is only a question of 'the nitrogen plans must be off the table'. The government should not give in to that, we have a climate problem and (among other things) the surplus of farms must be dealt with by force.

Where is your brain, soon no more gas income, export or tax income to pay your benefits.

Useful but quickly an abundance of foreign products, preferably also vegan food from the USA or Brazil. As long as it is a country where genetically modified is allowed!!!

You probably have no idea what that means, then they can spray the crops with glyphosate. Seems healthy to me

? 18 December 2019

I hope FDF comes back hard, and now with real action, not that slack stuff of the past, the government is of no use at all, the longer you let it rot, the more it starts to stink

Johan 18 December 2019

Arie, now just as many cows as in 1950, moreover Nh3 does not pollute Nox, on the other hand. Our food must meet x requirements, then meat comes from far away niestan . manure that a farmer can use must be removed by trucks emitting Nox. The Hague just calls out. Good that action was taken today and the Germans THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

shoemakers 1 18 December 2019

good buyout Arie, you cannot expect that from a government body, I can provide you with countless examples that the government does not buy out, but smokes out

bblogic 18 December 2019

There is a surplus of natura2000 areas that are not worthy of the name "nature". Eliminate these areas and the "nitrogen" problem is gone. These areas are often predatory areas from the past. For hundreds of years many heathland and sand drifts have been soded and grazed by sheep to supply the scarce fertile soils with nitrogen with sheep manure and heather sods. This came to an end with the advent of fertilizer. Nitrogen was no longer a problem, and the robbery areas gradually became more fertile again, and plants that required poor soils had a hard time. This process is nothing but pure nature. It is therefore unbelievably stupid to use a Natura2000 label to keep these kinds of areas poor, and to flatten half the country. So get rid of those natura2000 areas and the problem is solved. How simple can it be.

Subscriber

Farmer Jan 19 December 2019

It is in particular the unreliability and greed for regulation of the government that provokes farmers to the extreme, the hypocrisy that drips from policy and interpretation.
The attitude of the LTO certainly does not help to improve confidence, a so-called agreement on points will not help.
Squeezed for years by the elite, and administrators. While they just make all kinds of treaties for cheap import feed with countries where much less strict rules regarding production apply.

I wonder when the activists will preventively remove all processed products from the shelves that have been produced with imported cage eggs.
Unilever will not like that, but the public can understand it.

Arnaud 19 December 2019

the supervisor of the institution Arie is in had not paid attention for a moment.

Jannie 19 December 2019

There is a lot of cognitive dissonance; looking for arguments to straighten out what is crooked. Citizens become racially less sympathetic to the actions; nuisance by chaos.

Subscriber

crow 19 December 2019

Well Jannie among the farmers there is no cognitive dissonance, they are in full agreement. The government destroys everything that has been built up in a hundred years.

Marie 19 December 2019

@kraai, don't you read media or comments from other farmers. It's a cacophony, a lá overcrowded chicken coop.

arable Brabant 19 December 2019

bblogic wrote:

There is a surplus of natura2000 areas that are not worthy of the name "nature". Eliminate these areas and the "nitrogen" problem is gone. These areas are often predatory areas from the past. For hundreds of years many heathland and sand drifts have been soded and grazed by sheep to supply the scarce fertile soils with nitrogen with sheep manure and heather sods. This came to an end with the advent of fertilizer. Nitrogen was no longer a problem, and the robbery areas gradually became more fertile again, and plants that required poor soils had a hard time. This process is nothing but pure nature. It is therefore unbelievably stupid to use a Natura2000 label to keep these kinds of areas poor, and to flatten half the country. So get rid of those natura2000 areas and the problem is solved. How simple can it be.

@bblogic, absolutely correct.

here nature is completely adapted and excavated to make it organized nature. Nature is originally rich in organic matter and therefore fertilizers in abundance in the soil.
Now an area is being built here that has been completely overhauled and no longer contains any organic matter. The whole bottom is also driven to a great depth like concrete. they think it's crazy that nothing wants to grow anymore.
and when grass and trees start to grow again after a while, that should not happen because the heath of poverty has started to grow, and it disappears.

herb 19 December 2019

from tomorrow let all the milk flow away for 1 month.
you achieve more with that

farmer Dieuwke 19 December 2019

@Krud. If you do that, you shouldn't be a farmer. That is also criminal behavior. Milkless is worse than ammonia. Get to work flail.

??? !!! 19 December 2019

krud wrote:

from tomorrow let all the milk flow away for 1 month.
you achieve more with that

How can I help pay, have no milk and see that as the first working option!? Task for BO arable farming???!!!

Will Dill 20 December 2019

With Rutte, our country is under water and it's our own fault

THAT'S VVD MENTALITY

pete 20 December 2019

Dear people,
I think our country is pretty sick in the head.
Everyone only has an opinion based on incorrect information.
There is no longer any respect for people with a different opinion and that makes it very difficult to find a solution together as it works in a normal democracy.
Groups in society are only lumped together, while I am convinced that in every group the majority consists of people who are born as good people.
Farmers are also lumped together while there is a huge difference between arable farmers, dairy farmers, pig farmers, chicken farmers and other agricultural sectors, each with partly opposing interests.
Politicians cannot therefore state that they have reached an agreement with the farmers in 1 day, because it is impossible because of this diversity to achieve this so quickly.
This requires a lengthy period of respectful consultation and giving and taking in order to reach an agreement together and a vote of all farmers, as befits a democracy.
Farmers now hear on TV that farmers have reached an agreement while +- 99% of the farmers have not been asked anything at all.
Today we live in a comparison society where greed, envy, jealousy and abuse of power play an increasing role and the most important things that can really contribute to happiness such as contentment, taking people as they are, love, sincerity, being there for each other, etc. hit the background.
Many people have a certain view and want to force that view on others at all costs, disrespectful of a different opinion, without facing reality.
Or am I seeing it all wrong?
I too do not have a monopoly on wisdom and I am open to thinking along about other points of view.

pete 20 December 2019

Facts
After the war, farmers were still very much appreciated and the EU started giving subsidies to encourage farmers to expand in order to secure food supplies.
This has gone on too long.(my opinion)
In the EU, prices for agricultural products have also been kept artificially high by buying products from a certain minimum price by the EU.
I think it's wrong because that disrupts normal market forces and that's how you create surpluses (in my opinion)
At some point, the EU decided that it would be better to abolish those coastally high prices.
Because farmers have taken these artificially high prices into account with their business plans, financial obligations, it was decided to pay farmers direct supplements, otherwise many farmers would go bankrupt.
These allowances are phased out annually.
Would it be better to leave the EU so that we have to contribute less and no longer receive these subsidies and many other subsidies and just arrange this as the Netherlands itself?
I have to admit that I don't have enough reliable information to give a meaningful answer.
In the agricultural sector, by far the most subsidy goes to arable farmers and not to livestock farming.
In my opinion, no subsidy at all for the pig and chicken sector, which is so under attack.
Manure problem?
In my opinion, almost 100% of the chicken manure is processed or crosses the border.
In the pig sector, at least 60% of the surplus manure is also processed or is processed across the border.
The remainder is placed with arable farmers who do not have livestock of their own.
There are strict rules that determine the maximum amount of manure.
In my opinion, that maximum amount should be increased somewhat in combination with very strict punishments for those few fraudsters who ruin it for the entire sector.

pete 20 December 2019

The government is the main culprit for the increase in scale in livestock farming.
Facts:
The government has decided for the pig sector that the AVERAGE ammonia emissions per pig should fall from 4,5 to max 1,5 kg from +- 2000
The farmer then has the choice to adapt all existing barns to reduce ammonia emissions or to build a very large barn with air scrubbers, so that these pigs only produce 0.2 kg of ammonia, so that the average per pig is still below 1,5. XNUMX kg comes.
The values used are not exactly correct, but they are very close to the truth.
Investing in air scrubbers on existing stables is not profitable, so the government has created a situation of pumping or drowning.
Agricultural advisers and also the banks have made good use of this by brainwashing the pig farmers with the idea that they can do nothing but expand considerably if they want to remain farmers.
And then greed, jealousy and envy and comparison also come into play; what else can I do as well or even better.
I think it is good that the government is going to look at what went wrong in the past, to apologize for this and to remove the bad apples from the Ministry of Agriculture.
If the government treats livestock farmers with respect, livestock farmers are indeed willing to reduce livestock, provided there is a good tax-free compensation in return.
In combination with a good retraining scheme or early retirement.
The farming profession is a profession in its own right, most family businesses have been around for many generations.
Most of them are not at all concerned with money but just want to be farmers.
It takes a very long respectful process to convince these people that they can also do something else that will give them more free time and perhaps become much happier.
This too is different for every person; There are also people who become happy by working more than 60 hours, I also respect that, everyone should know for themselves.
Wishing everyone (also the people with other opinions) good luck, wisdom and happy holidays
A lot of

arable farmer 20 December 2019

Well, now, you understand. Google it first I'd say.

In 2019, NL will have the same income support per ha everywhere. Before that, an intensive dairy farmer had clearly more per hectare. This is slowly being phased out

pete 20 December 2019

Farmer, you are right except for the googling. Did I claim otherwise?
Read carefully what I write!

pete 20 December 2019

The chicken farmers and pig farmers who have no land receive NO subsidy and these are precisely sectors that should be halved according to the left-wing parties.

Drent 20 December 2019

this subsidy was created as compensation for the low grain prices in the 90s, later on all kinds of surcharges that were previously on a product were added, such as starch support, slaughter contribution, etc. All the surcharges have now been equalized and farmers who in the past received nothing now also a hectare aid while others have had to give up quite a bit. The fact that some of the farmers do not receive a subsidy is only due to the fact that they have no land.

Hub Rich 20 December 2019

Pietje, a relief to read a contribution that is constructive. I am really concerned about the atmosphere in agriculture. I do understand the emotions and the uncertainty. And this forum isn't necessarily the cross-section of agriculture. All too often the opinion here is that everything outside of agriculture is idiotic and/or criminal. And that everything about agriculture is good because it is based on common sense.
I largely agree with your analyses. But I see all kinds of developments as a process that has its own logic. With your comment "I think it's good that the government is going to look at what went wrong in the past, apologize for this and remove the bad apples from the Ministry of Agriculture." I don't agree. My view is that the agricultural lobby has been too strong rather than too weak in the past, resulting in the current situation. That could have been different. And this is also the case in other countries. In Germany, livestock farming is practically entirely land-based. You state that there is no manure surplus because a lot is processed or exported. That's right. However, that is a huge financial burden for livestock farming. Is it true that in livestock farming, half an annual income per job is spent on manure disposal?
Isn't it strange that the livestock sector wants to maintain its level with all its strength? I understand the emotion behind that, but if the sector shrinks by 25-33%, the fertilizer disposal costs will drop to zero. I'm a farmer myself, so I'm not saying it in my interest. In fact, the importance of arable farming is that you get manure with money, that the beet pulp yields good money, that feed grain is more profitable than baking wheat. If intensive livestock farming falls sharply, this is beneficial for farmers in that sector, but unfavorable for suppliers and buyers - including arable farming.

arable farmer 20 December 2019

Pietje wrote:

The chicken farmers and pig farmers who have no land receive NO subsidy and these are precisely sectors that should be halved according to the left-wing parties.

Without hectare allowances, the wheat price would certainly be higher, this support once came for a guaranteed and cheap food package. This automatically benefits the chickens and pig farmers.

But I can remove the support, I'd rather just have my income from the market.

Besides, a lot of civil servants are also saved at RVO.

Subscriber

smart ass 20 December 2019

would also be useful if the farmers speak with one mouth, and not two at news hour who challenge each other's ideas.
always the same one sitting there

rule maker 21 December 2019

I hardly believe that the price of our products would be higher without the payment rights, our regulators always find it much too nice to let their friends from Fargogistan bring everything on the market here that does not have to meet any requirement, animal welfare, antibiotics, hormones and you name it

pete 21 December 2019

You can't talk about "the farming lobby" or "the farmers"
Farmers used to be mixed companies, but nowadays they mainly specialize in arable farming, pig farmer, chicken farmer, dairy farmer, meat farmer and other sectors that also have many conflicting interests.
What is the problem in taking a realistic look at what went wrong in the past and farmers were treated outrageously and measures were taken by the government that actually caused the increase in scale?
Was the former agricultural lobby impartial or was it self-interest or insider knowledge?
Did this lobby represent all farmers or just a very small group of farmers?
Isn't it against human rights to take 10% of pig rights, to oblige people with a valid permit to take expensive emission-limiting measures, etc., without any financial compensation?
Then they can now also think of adapting all cars within a few years to reduce nitrogen and co2 emissions without any financial compensation for this and with immediate effect lock the expansion of the number of cars and introduce a car right that is traded. can become.
What is the difference?

pete 21 December 2019

But cars bring in a lot of money for the treasury through road tax and very high tax on fuel.
Also of our energy bill eventually +- 75% goes to the treasury because of all the misleading taxes.
It's a big hypocritical mess in the second room.

Skirt 21 December 2019

I sometimes wonder how it is possible that such a rich and densely populated country like NL manages to spend so much money that a high tax burden/excise is necessary to round the budget.
In a normal business it would be a serious form of complete mismanagement.

hans 22 December 2019

Skirt

The Dutch government makes the working person pay, up to 85% of his earnings (incl. bel., VAT, excise duty, and certainly also through the nursing insurances).

divides this money in part over
- the entire population so that large companies can sell their much too expensive stuff so that they can pay their mega profits as dividend to the happy few,

- and part of this money is spent directly on large companies that carry out "assignments" from the state that are far too expensive, often of substandard quality so that the money tap continues to flow and who can also transfer their mega profits to that same happy few.

The Netherlands is "rich" but the common man has only ever higher debt, directly and indirectly. The Dutchman is only the conduit of wealth.

The same thing sometimes happens in "normal companies", by transferring all the money from a successful company to the management and shareholders, a bankrupt BV remains behind.
Unfortunately, the Netherlands is more of a cooperative, so the members (residents) will soon be held jointly and severally liable and have to pay the debt.

Subscriber

quite coarse 22 December 2019

You are talking about a rich country!!
Don't make me laugh, the national debt divided by the number of inhabitants is about 24000 euros per inhabitant.
Add to that the debts of municipalities and you have a thick 30k debt per inhabitant of the Netherlands.
In my opinion, the Netherlands is very poor and have looked after the store very poorly.
They certainly don't know how to make money.
They don't even know how to write it in The Hague!!

hans 22 December 2019

What does "The Hague" do differently from its inhabitants, its voters?

Everyone borrows against the rocks, pays what the madman asks, lets the bank go to the extreme. Land and houses that just increase in value by 10% per year. Can't break, you're crazy if you don't participate.

And then suddenly everyone is penniless, all property is in the hands of big business, because there is a "crisis".

It remains a rich country, only the owners have changed names.

joop 23 December 2019

if you have people at work, you pay for 4 people and you only get 1 (read wage costs, tax, ect), 3 eat for nothing. reward the working man/woman and punish the unemployed. with the green ones more and more are eating for nothing, the greens have never worked

pete 23 December 2019

It is easy to work with money from others. Politicians come up with all kinds of plans for a big salary that they do not have to pay themselves and are not financially responsible themselves.
For the same reason, this often goes wrong in cooperatives.
Even in charitable organizations this goes wrong because there are people at the top who appropriate an outrageous amount of money.
How hypocritical can you be?

Phosphate law, pig law, dairy law etc
Where is the end?
When will there be a human right, should families that grow too fast also shrink?

jpkievit 23 December 2019

Attention the agricultural collective must continue to stick to their demands no water with the wine

George 24 December 2019

That all you can think about now is wine.

Subscriber

wig maker 24 December 2019

What a wonderful contribution, Hans.
The nail on the head, the 'happy few' are Rutte and the shareholders of the multinationals that the world has to crawl for.
The people who have to do the work are slaves to Big Capital.

hans 24 December 2019

Thank you Wigmaker, and think about my message when you see one of those happy few again uttering his "Christmas message" with peace on Earth.
One of the club that is up to its neck guilty of the wrongs on this Earth, that will defend its positions at any cost, simply strip the planet and the people on it, and that their property is billions of dollars every year!! per person increases and announces that we have to tighten our belts and work more because the cake is supposedly finished.

pete 25 December 2019

Yes Hans, the world is sick.
Greed, jealousy and envy are the greatest enemies of man.
This creates, among other things, abuse of power, misplaced pride, own truths because people do not want to admit at all costs that they are wrong, etc.
Merry Christmas everyone!

Subscriber

wig maker 26 December 2019

Give us bread and games, the people ask. The happy few supposedly take care of this and expand its abuses every year by billions of euros. If you expose this, you are immediately dismissed as a conspiracy theorist or a rigid pessimist.
Thankful that there are people with the same mindset.

News peasant protests

Niels van der Boom

More about

Sign up for our newsletter

Call our customer service +0320(269)528

or mail to support@boerenbusiness.nl

do you want to follow us?

Receive our free Newsletter

Current market information in your inbox every day

Our used vehicles

About Boerenbusiness

Our customer service