Background Nitrogen mood
Wiersma is being obstructive and Lbv is not a mole eater
Although new craziness is dished up in the news every day, nitrogen news continues to compete for attention remarkably well and steadily. For example, Minister of Agriculture Wiersma has scored quite high for a few weekends in a row because she is supposedly obstructing the Schoof Committee (officially the Ministerial Committee for Economy and Nature Restoration). Wiersma is said to be blocking solutions that could harm farmers, is the story.
Of course, these messages do not come out via the spokesperson of the committee, but are leaked. That is how it goes. The question is whether the minister is really that obstructive, and also whether she is alone or the only critical voice. Matters are also regularly 'framed' in a certain direction. Of course, anyone can do that. But Wiersma does not necessarily have to get the rainbow Piet.
More critical ministers
Reliable sources know that the Minister of LVVN is certainly not alone when it comes to a critical attitude towards the prevailing nitrogen discourse. Other ministers sometimes express themselves even more critically. However, much of the reporting from The Hague on the nitrogen dossier is remarkably uncritical. Perhaps because the subject matter is so complicated and it takes time and effort to delve into it. Moreover, the civil service is often not representative of what the ministers want.
High costs per mole when purchasing
And when it comes to complicated matters: sometimes a lot of bells should ring almost automatically, for example when reading a reply letter van Wiersma on parliamentary questions about nitrogen policy. The question from the House was how many moles of nitrogen have been reduced so far with the various purchase schemes (Lbv, Lbv+ etc.). Some €3 billion has been spent on this so far. The answer is downright shocking: a mere 37 moles, or more than 80 million per mole. For the context: in 2022 the average (calculated) deposition amounted to 1.375 moles per hectare per year. According to nitrogen expert Wouter de Heij, that 37 moles is also on the high side. He thinks that the earlier at 32 mol remains and laughs at the apparent accuracy that officials give to the official figure of 37,02 moles.
And then there are members of parliament who want the government to spend more money on buying up farms. Usually these are the same members of parliament who do have sympathy for the approach of Johan Vollenbroek and his friends from MOB and co.
MOB and co get personal
Until now, Vollenbroek always said that he had nothing against individual farmers, but that must have changed at some point in the past. In the Peel, he is busy taking away the nature permit from ten dairy farms. Why he leaves other companies there alone is a mystery. It looks a bit like cherry picking. Moreover, what do ten nature permits mean for a calculated nitrogen reduction that probably cannot be expressed in tenths of moles?
Lily growers
Objectively speaking, there seems to be little to fear from him, but the judiciary sometimes goes very far in understanding concerned citizens and theoretical risks, as also became apparent this week from a ruling by the Council of State against lily growers. They have to comply with the (extremely uncertain) nature permit. Before anyone thinks: 'Oh, that's only about lily growers', it is good to remember that this also concerns the use of resources in general, and that is such a difficult dossier. The country's highest judges apparently have difficulty making a broader assessment of interests and seem to find it more important to spin out the precautionary principle to its ultimate consequence. The politicians stand by and watch.
Provinces go further
The latter is not entirely true, because at the provincial level there are still governments that also think that it could be a few notches sharper. For example, the provinces of South Holland and Utrecht want to introduce an emission ceiling for ammonia of around 40 to 45 kilos per hectare. Agriculture can do little with that either, these provinces may think that, now that the phenomenon of 'ammonia from the sea' is being brushed aside by the RIVM, that another obstacle may take its place.
Nitrogen from the sea or Maasvlakte?
In addition, the air in South Holland continues to be polluted with an as yet unexplained high concentration of nitrogen, but that could of course also be NOx from industry. In Noord-Brabant, deputy Rooijakkers is meanwhile working on a campaign to expropriate agricultural companies for the benefit of nature. That promises to be quite a job, because nature permits must also be withdrawn for that and a lot of evidence is needed to do that. On the other hand, perhaps there are judges who understand Rooijakkers well.
Cosiness
Given all these issues, it is striking how little protest and other action there is currently from the advocacy. A few groups, such as Stichting Stikstofclaim (SSC) and Agractie, continue to beat the drum, for the rest you don't hear much from advocacy groups. According to Jan Cees Vogelaar, this may be because some groups (NAJK) actually prefer social clubs are then lobbyists. But even after that claim, silence remained.
Stop bickering
Did nothing encouraging happen in the past week? Yes, indeed. SGP MEP Bert Jan Ruissen got the European Parliament's agricultural committee behind him to urge the EU's two other decision-making bodies, the Commission and the Council, to act quickly in approving Renure, and thus to put an end to the bickering in the nitrate committee. It is no guarantee of success, but it does increase the pressure.
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.
