The first major debate of the new House of Representatives with the outgoing ministers Adema and Van der Wal did not yet lead to major changes last Thursday. Yet there were successes with a series of adopted motions, but also sensitive lessons during collisions between newcomers and old hands. In the Nitrogen Mood section we give an impression of the nitrogen crisis in our own way.
Temporarily returning MP Tjeerd de Groot (D66), who can replace a party member on maternity leave, caused Cor Pierik of BBB to pause for a moment with his question about 'the European deterioration ban', a concept that also bothered Harm Holman (NSC). .
Advice Council of State
Both MPs argued for what they considered to be a slightly more realistic treatment of agricultural companies in relation to nature. Holman called for the KDW standard to be adjusted from 0,05 mol to 1 mol, because, according to him, this has an arithmetic but no practical effect. He also added that before an adjustment could be implemented, he would first have to receive advice from the Council of State.
Hole path to Kneuterdijk
De Groot immediately noticed 'goat paths' and believed that such a thing is absolutely not possible, supported by fellow MP Laura Bromet (GroenLinks). Minister Van der Wal was also not enthusiastic. However, a majority in Parliament spoke in favor of a number of motions to relax the nitrogen and nature policy.
Rutte's mantras 3 and 4
Ultimately, it is also up to politicians to make adjustments if desired. The 'prohibition on deterioration', just like the concept of 'good conservation status', has been used frequently in recent years to give political substance to certain wishes, often in combination with another term: the precautionary principle. Under Rutte 3 and 4, they started working as mantras with a magical effect. Whoever introduced these terms silenced all discussion.
Silence constructs
In fact, they are simply constructs, devised by administrators and lawyers to achieve precisely the above-mentioned effect. It is therefore funny to see that they have been developed and applied in different ways in different EU member states.
Brussels knows what to do
If desired, the concepts can also be pushed aside or 'overruled'. Such as the European Commission did this week with the problem of the wolf (formally still a proposal, but will almost certainly go ahead). This animal is strictly protected in Europe, but much more so in the Netherlands than in, for example, Germany or France. This is partly due to a very effective wolf lobby, fencing with 'the conservation status'. As protests by rural residents grow rapidly across the EU, the Commission is forced to step back. She now listens to more sounds and no longer only believes the counts and other data from 'wolf experts'. The status of the wolf is downgraded from strictly protected to protected, which means that population management also becomes possible.
Howl
It won't happen without howling from many wolf friends, but the policy will change. This week, members of the House of Representatives, in particular D66, GroenLinks/PvdA and PvdD, also noticed such a change in policy regarding agriculture and nature. Member of Parliament Esther Ouwehand tried to show, using examples from recent decades, that a slightly milder attitude towards livestock farming is doomed to failure.
Methane breakdown
She also has no confidence in innovation and technical solutions, just like Christianne van der Wal. Yet they are there. Just this week came a group of Danish researchers has come out with a revolutionary but simple way to neutralize methane. It is expected that in the not too distant future there will be a well-functioning housing system for this.
Figures from another decade
Surprisingly enough, old and non-change-oriented behavior is currently coming from the departing politicians. Piet Adema, for whatever reason, felt it necessary to do his alarming water quality reporting to Brussels on data from the period 2010 to 2013, as he himself writes. There seems to be a lot more going on with those figures, but data from ten years ago! Which politician dares to go out with that in a credible manner!
Adema's sadness
The minister acts as if he has no choice, as with a series of other decisions he sent to Parliament in recent weeks. For example about the manure. The House of Representatives is not satisfied with this and wants a different approach. Adema heard it and on Thursday thought plaintively about the time when there still seemed to be a prospect of an Agriculture Agreement. "I regret more and more every day that it didn't work out then."