Background Nitrogen mood
Chronicle of panic and backward policies
Government action with regard to the nitrogen problem shows a strange paradox: the more and heavier policy the government deploys in the field of nitrogen, the further away the solution is. The reason is that government policy is predominantly reactive - responding to disappointing court rulings - and The Hague is increasingly digging itself deeper into a self-made tunnel.
Judgments of the court in the Netherlands, often provoked by MOB or, for example, the Brabantse Milieufederatie, and sometimes also by the European Court of Justice, force the government to respond. Often with further restrictions for companies as a result. What companies are still allowed to do is becoming increasingly precise and more restrictive. The most recent development is that from now on internal netting will also be subject to a permit requirement. In other cases, the government simply lets the business community down because it doesn't know a solution. See the PAS detectors and the companies with an approved low-emission barn. For the first group, 'customization' is now being promised with a budget of €250 million, but without an indication of how the problem should be solved and also without a guarantee of success.
policy space shot away
For farmers, as well as for other businesses, the constant retreat and containment movements are frustrating and paralyzing. The situation is also unworkable for the government itself. It has been pushed so far onto the defensive in numerous court cases that an important part of its own policy space has been shot away. Many reactions that now come from the department therefore often have the character of panic measures. That is a pity, especially when you consider that there are already about eighty civil servants working for the Nitrogen Directorate of LNV, and dozens more at other ministries and the provinces.
Old policy wrong on all sides
However, if judges make nasty rulings, you shouldn't be angry with the judge, Agriculture Minister Piet Adema told a group of farmers in Zwartsluis this week. "Then it is not well arranged at the front," he said. So also with the nitrogen problem. There is insufficient thought in the legislation. As a result, the policy, which was supposed to reduce emissions, turned out wrong in all directions. The countryside was revolted by apparently unilateral and also incessant measures aimed at the peasants and those close to them. The Netherlands is colored in Brussels because commitments made in the field of nature and the environment are always not met. The fact that this is because faulty legislation is always dismissed does not play a role for Brussels. Finally, the legal instruments that the government has been using in recent years are now being used against itself.
No new wind yet
Nevertheless, it is not expected that a different wind will blow from The Hague very soon. The current policy has been heavily invested, with a lot of prestige and billions of money in reserve. Minister Van der Wal continues to aim for the buy-out of agricultural companies in order to reduce nitrogen emissions, but one regulation is already getting in the way of the other. This is clearly visible in Limburg in particular. There, prospective participants in an older buy-back scheme are hesitant to sign, now that Van der Wal seems to be offering much more money for a new scheme. Whether that is really allowed, or whether it will still run into the state aid test, remains to be seen later. Meanwhile, the idea of a preferential right for the state is also being put forward when purchasing agricultural land. Is this the stick behind the door if the buyout above the market value (the square root) does not work? Or is this intended as a more widely usable tool?
Consent Grant
The government also promises to work for more legal certainty with regard to existing and yet to be obtained permits, but has failed to indicate how this should be done for the time being. The new focus on the concept of 'granting permission' does not immediately come across as reassuring.
In the meantime, new reinforcements are also coming, such as an increase in the water level in peat meadow areas. A limitation of livestock density to 2,3 large livestock units per hectare was on the table, but does not seem to become a reality for the time being. This is then immediately one of the few 'windfalls' that can be reported, otherwise the legal noose continues to be tightened.
Klaas van der Horst
© 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.
