Background Nitrogen mood
European Commissioner gives Parliament a lesson in agro-politics
The new European Commissioner for Agriculture Christophe Hansen visited the House of Representatives this week. It was the first time in seven years that such a meeting had taken place. You could perhaps call it indicative of the level of Dutch navel-gazing that it took so long for the Dutch agricultural representatives to once again take in the Brussels perspective, but that is a bit too easy.
Much has changed, especially in Brussels and perhaps more than the House of Representatives has realised up to now. European Commissioner Christophe Hansen did not come to teach the Dutch farmers a lesson; that they are not doing it right again, or still not. Rather, he came to teach the House of Representatives a friendly lesson, and to give the Dutch farmers a pat on the back. "We have lost too many farmers in Europe in recent years, and we cannot afford to lose any more. We really need all those who are still here," said Hansen. Because Europe should not be or become dependent on countries outside of Europe for its food. A recording of the conversation has been well hidden by the House of Representatives, but view here.
Not the story you wanted
This was clearly not the story that a number of members of parliament, including PvdD, Volt and GroenLinks-PvdA, needed. Gone are the days when Timmermans and Samsom made the music in Brussels. The first leads a small merger party, the second works for a fossil fuel seller. The questions from the parties mentioned were reserved, the faces spoke volumes.
Hansen knows his file
Hansen was not impressed by it. Here was no bumbling agricultural commissioner who did not know his file or who was isolated from his colleagues in the committee. Hansen mastered the subject matter, without hesitation dug into details of regulations and names of difficult crop protection products from memory and also knows where the problems are for agriculture in the files of environment and water, and what he wants to do together with his colleagues to make agriculture more workable again.
Problem analysis clear
It starts with an extensive problem analysis. Farmers in the EU are not only confronted with issues that play a role in the Directorate-General for Agriculture, the Environment (nitrate directive/derogation) or animal and public health (approval of products), but often also with national and even regional heads, as is evident from an inventory that he had made. The European Commission wants to look at this more critically, Hansen indicated. Just like at the approval policy for crop protection. The approval of new products must be much faster and Europe-wide. He takes the US as an example for this.
Away with ideology and blackmail
Furthermore, Hansen stated that he would accept the loss of resources for scientific reasons, but would no longer bow to the loss of resources 'for ideological reasons'. He also does not want to allow the import of food that has been treated with resources that are no longer permitted in the EU. "The EU must no longer bow to blackmail in this area from other countries."
Manure is valuable
The Lower House is naturally very respectful to a visiting European Commissioner, but it also forces Dutch politicians to talk about the importance of agriculture and food at a different level than they are used to. Where a conversation with your own Dutch minister about manure quickly gets bogged down in details and impossibilities, and manure from VVD and NSC to PvdD is mainly portrayed as a waste product, Hansen calls manure a valuable asset, which is needed in many places in Europe.
Wiersma's hands and feet
Perhaps Minister Femke Wiersma would also like to call it that, but she does not. At a discussion evening with Agractie in Markelo, she made it clear that for the time being she is still tied hand and foot and is stuck between the current Brussels rules and the lack of space that the House of Representatives gives her. She did not say it quite so literally, but she indicated that she is firmly bound to the agreements in the coalition agreement, and that she has to continue to find support for her policy on many subjects with difficulty.
Other Nitrate Directive
Nevertheless, Wiersma is trying to find new space, by seeking a new derogation for 2026, by striving to amend the Nitrate Directive and by putting pressure on the approval of artificial fertilizer substitutes (Renure). A European decision in principle has already been made on this, but the European nitrate committee has been arguing about the implementation details for almost three quarters of a year now, according to reports from there.
Out of the web, into the trap?
Wiersma spends most of her time looking for a solution to the nitrogen problem, she said. The Schoof Commission will soon publish its first report, but it is far from finished with its work, the minister said. Between the lines, she said that part of the solution is being sought in a switch from a deposit policy to an emissions policy. It is also in the coalition agreement. Many farmers are not keen on that, because they fear that it will trap them in a new trap and nail them to unachievable targets. The advantage of an emissions policy for the cabinet is that it can free them from the current legal web that has been stretched around the nitrogen issue.
KDW out of law, Aerius unclear
Wiersma also aims to have the KDW removed from the law, because it is a 'moving target', she said. Earlier this week, she asked the Council of State for urgent advice on the sustainability of an arithmetic lower limit of 1 mole. This is an attempt to circumvent the delaying tactics of the House of Representatives. The majority of the House of Representatives mainly wants to wait and see. Wiersma did not say whether she also aims to have Aerius removed from the law. In fact, that is also a moving target, with annual updates that are stricter and, to top it all off, with substantial changes afterwards. A poignant example is the latest report on 'ammonia from the sea', which on closer inspection does not seem to exist, but whose calculated effects have cost agriculture a lot of money. Bureau Wing in Wageningen has also been trying to sell licenses for Aerius elsewhere in Europe in recent years. The constant corrections are not a recommendation for the product.
What has the minister actually achieved?
As BBB minister, Wiersma could count on the sympathy of many farmers in Markelo, but it also grated that she had made so little concrete progress for agriculture. It was even shouted at her outright. The intentions may be good, the progress is not.
Greenpeace doesn't win everywhere
That brings the situation back to the Dutch environmental clamp. The European Commission appears to have taken another step. And Greenpeace, so praised in the Netherlands, no longer has the wind in its sails everywhere. In the United States, a state judge (not Trump) has ruled in favor of a pipeline owner in a case against the environmental multinational. Greenpeace must pay $660 million for damages suffered by the company Energy Transfer. An amount of $132 million is to be paid by Greenpeace International in Amsterdam, but it is counting on a less strict Dutch judge to stop that.
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.
