On Tuesday 16 May, the Senate debated the introduction of the system of phosphate rights and the land-based growth of dairy farming Act. Read the live blog about the debate below.
This is a co-production of Esther de Snoo and Herma van den Pol.
Next Tuesday (May 23) both bills will be voted on in the Senate. The meeting closed at 23:11 PM. This also closed our live blog.
Update 23:07
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): We cannot regulate milk production per cow. The government does oversee animal welfare and that is what this should be about, not about the number of liters per cow.
Update 22:57
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): The sector is not currently locked up and will not be locked down by legislation in the future. The cows that are less productive have a lower phosphate excretion. The system takes the productivity of cows into account. That is why the phosphate rights system is smarter than animal rights. He has already discouraged 3 motions that have been submitted.
Update 22:46 PM
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): The Netherlands should be happy with Brussels' lenient attitude. In fact, we are already breaking the standards for the third year. We should be glad we got the chance to rectify this violation.
The derogation is not necessarily an interest for an individual company. The same applies to organic farms. There is an environmental and social interest linked to the derogation. For the common good, you can expect everyone to make a contribution.
This therefore applies to all companies that have grown, especially those that have grown after July 2015. We can ask all growers (organic and soil-bound or not) to make their contribution.
Update 22:42
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): The shortage committee must be able to advise on how the shortage regulation can be expanded and which criteria should be used. This must be translated into an Order in Council. RVO will assess the bottlenecks individually.
The tax depreciation of phosphate rights is not yet entirely clear to me. I will make this wish of the House possible. I don't know yet how I'm going to do that. In any case, it will not be ready for the vote.
Update 22:36
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): The phosphate bank is not intended for generic measures. The phosphate bank is intended for the issuance of phosphate rights to specific cases, such as young farmers and land-bound companies. Dairy farming is made up of family businesses and that is how dairy farmers are the strongest.
Update 22:24
Niko Kofferman (PvdD): I am submitting a motion to set a maximum milk production per cow. Pasture grazing must be linked to phosphate production. The milk yield of dairy cows has increased enormously. There has to be a limit to that. The cows are literally milked.
Update 22:18 PM
René Dercksen (PVV): How should we approve a law, of which it is not even clear yet what the bottleneck arrangement will look like. 400 to 500 dairy farmers will file a lawsuit against the reduction plan. It threatens to become a legal joust.
Update 22:12
Lambert Verheijen (PvdA): I hope the phosphate system makes it to the finish line. With that, I hope that we will manage to get the derogation.
Update 22:06
Meta Meijer (SP): I'm filing a motion for non-negotiable rights. These rights must be issued through the phosphate bank.
Update 22:02
Marijke Vos (GroenLinks) against Van Dam: You say that organic manure is also polluted. Organic manure has its own sales and they generally do not make use of the derogation. I would nevertheless like to submit a motion to exclude this group from the phosphate rights system. It is a group that can be legally defined.
Update 21:56
Sybe Schaap (VVD): The answer from the State Secretary makes me more positive, perhaps even optimistic. I am very skeptical about using the phosphate bank, especially when issuing to special cases. We use phosphate for generic creaming. The bottleneck committee should not apply double standards. The advice of the committee is not necessarily binding, but strongly advisory.
Update 21:45
Paul Schnabel (D66): The position of organic companies should be strengthened, also in the future.
Update 21:40
Joop Atsma (CDA): The pain hits a lot of companies hard. In the initial phase, there was a gradual distribution through the phosphate bank. Before the final vote, the State Secretary must clearly inform us of what he has in mind about the feed-manure contracts. Dairy farming is predominantly conventional and non-industrial. The contrast between biological and intensive is not real.
Update 21:18
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): Today it is not about the phosphate reduction plan, but about the phosphate rights law. I consider the judge's decision to be disputable and I will therefore appeal.
Update 21:15 PM
René Dercksen (PVV): You are asking us to approve a law with a hardship settlement, which the judge recently said is not correct. This is because the entrepreneurs would be disproportionately taxed as a result of the phosphate reduction plan. That's abrasive.
Update 21:08 PM
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): Each kilo of phosphate produced on an organic farm counts just as heavily as the kilos of phosphate produced on a non-organic farm (when the phosphate ceiling is exceeded). Then it is also reasonable to ask the organic companies for a contribution to get the phosphate production below the ceiling.
Update 21:02 PM
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): Organic farms are often land-based farms. There is already an exception to this, via the land-based growth law. It has therefore been decided not to make a specific exception for other organic farms.
Update 20:46 PM
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): What's plan B? There is no reason for pessimism. Sometimes it takes a bit of perseverance, also for individual companies, but we do have to stick to the course that has been set. Then there is no need for a plan B. The entry into operation of the feed track has been postponed until August 15, but it is not expected that this will be necessary.
There are even more possibilities for phosphate reduction. For example, there may be more feasible via the feed track and I have made agreements with the pig sector. Animals that have now been moved to Belgium can return in 2018, but then under the system of phosphate rights.
Update 20:36 PM
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): The final figures on phosphate will be released in June. The starting point for Brussels is the total national production ceiling for phosphate. The aim is not to reach the sector ceiling. Based on this, the provisional statement is 6,6 million kilos of phosphate. I am positive about that and I think we will achieve that target. In the Netherlands, we have made the division based on the sectors.
Update 20:26 PM
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): A study is still being conducted into various feed and fertilizer contracts. This has been incorporated into the law through an amendment. Before the phosphate rights come into effect, I will provide more information about this. There will also be consultation with the Ministry of Finance about the depreciation of the phosphate rights.
There will be no regulation to spare new and expanding organic dairy farmers. About 90 percent of organic farms are land-based, and those have already been excluded. There is no scope to make an exception for a specific type of business in addition to an exception for land-based businesses.
Update 20:15 PM
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): Another point to bear in mind is that trade is at the expense of extensive companies. The rights in the phosphate bank can be distributed on the basis of grazing and young farmers, goals that go further than European standards. This could be done via a tender and via a points system.
Those rights are a kind of exemptions. Nevertheless, an important part of making dairy farming more sustainable must take place within family businesses.
Update 20:05 PM
Peter Schalk (SGP): In the individual cases, the creaming of other dairy farmers must be taken into account, but compensation must be taken into account in groups in particular. How is that possible? Van Dam: 'An individual assessment is only made in very exceptional cases.'
Joop Atsma again asks for more time for the hardship committee. The advice is now to have the committee on 1 July 2017. This is due to the complexity of the cases. Van Dam: Postponement until September 1 is really not possible, so July will remain standing for the time being.
Update 19:54 PM
Sybe Sheep: The committee can introduce different categories, but RVO provides tailor-made solutions? Roel Kuiper (CU) asks whether there is really no phosphate room for pressure points. Van Dam argues that an extension of the bottlenecks means fewer rights for the other companies. This refers to the non-land-bound companies.
Update 19:40 PM
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): 'We have to come a long way in our talks with the European Commission.' That is Van Dam's response to Schalk's question about broadening or abolishing the ceiling. It means that not much is possible.
The choice for one reference date has been made to prevent more room for growth for companies that have consciously made a growth choice. This is in contrast to the companies that did not realize growth. Dijksma also warned in a very timely manner that unlimited growth was not possible. This refers to Article 1, referred to in summary proceedings as phosphate. Members of Parliament are concerned about this. Expropriation does not apply, because this is about regulation.
Update 19:23 PM
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): The sixth Action Program must be satisfactory for the derogation. The first exploratory talks for this have now been held. Why was no action taken earlier? Growth was expected, but within the limits that existed. It was the decision not to limit phosphate production directly.
Update 19:20 PM
Martijn van Dam (State Secretary): Van Dam believes that an assessment for the derogation should be made when the phosphate rights system comes into effect. That is on January 1, 2018. 'We are guaranteeing the production ceiling, because we are committed to it. The system will work when we are bound to it. At the end of the year, we will have to consider whether there is sufficient insight into the derogation for the system to come into effect.'
Update 17:20 PM
René Dercksen (PVV): 'Manure is a valuable raw material that we can add value. The phosphate rights system leads to a less varied sector and to the slaughter of 160.000 healthy cows.' He is critical of manure policy and refers to studies by the Mesdag Fund, the water standard and phosphate in Randstad.
Update 16:41 PM
Lambert Verheijen (PvdA): The risk of manure fraud must be minimized.
Meta Meijer (SP): Up to 2,5 LU no rights are required. Only then do rights have to be bought. Meijer also prefers to see a distribution of rights via the phosphate bank instead of the tradable rights. The SP also makes a strong plea to spare organic dairy farmers.
Update 16:20
Marijke Vos (Green Left): 'I mainly read threatening language in the letter of 12 May about the summary proceedings.' She asks for clarification. This clarification should clarify whether a fine can be imposed with retroactive effect.
Vos also has doubts about the exception of the special cow breeds, especially when there is also dairy cattle on the farm. This is because an income has to be earned and the special varieties alone cannot collect that.
Update 16:15
Marijke Vos (Green Left): There are certainly concerns about the phosphate reduction plan. There is also a connection between the phosphate summary proceedings and the phosphate rights system in 2018.
In addition, Vos makes a plea for the organic companies that were in conversion on 2 July 2015. She wondered why the State Secretary only focuses on dairy farming and not on goat and beef farming. They have also grown.
Sybe Schaap (VVD): Schaap wants a reintroduction of the development and rehabilitation fund in order to promote an accelerated exit. Farmers and horticulturists who want to stop are a brake on the innovation and development of the sector.
Peter Schalk (SGP): Schalk criticizes the hard date of 2 July 2015. Why is it not opted to give entrepreneurs the choice of a reference or a specific period? He also makes a comparison with pig rights.
In addition, the nitrate guideline is now being based on phosphate, but how can the phosphate ceiling then focus on water quality? He calls for a reform of the action program.
Paul Schnabel (D66): Notes that the cabinet is cautious when discussing the derogation. 'How firm are the statements from Brussels? Is there also a plan B if the derogation does disappear?'
He calculates that Statistics Netherlands, without measures, assumed 95,6 million kilos of phosphate production by dairy cattle. The ceiling is at 84,9 million kilos. The sector plan provides for a production of 89,9 million kilos. At the same time, there is the national ceiling. In order to achieve the target, 6 to 7 million kilos of phosphate still have to be reduced somewhere.
Schnabel points out that a tension is developing between the total number of companies and those who actually make use of the derogation.
Update 15:00
© 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.
