The nitrogen debate that was held yesterday in the House of Representatives was a discussion with a high level of unreality. A few observations in this regard: it mainly concerned the nitrogen, but agriculture minister Henk Staghouwer took the brunt of the blows as a lightning rod. Furthermore, research was often discussed as a basis for policy, but minister Christianne Van der Wal had difficulty linking the data credibly.
Nevertheless, for the time being the government can continue with what it is committed to: further rolling out the nitrogen policy - including the restructuring of the livestock herd. This is not unexpected, because the government coalition is holding together, despite grumbling from the supporters of three of the four parties. Moreover, parties such as GroenLinks, the PvdA, SP and Party for the Animals would like to go even further in their nitrogen approach.
Fender Staghouwer
Intentionally or unintentionally, it was convenient for the government that Minister Staghouwer also took part in the nitrogen debate and that he was the one who had to offer some perspective on all the gloomy stories, but was left empty-handed in the meantime. He functioned well as a lightning rod and cushion for colleague Van der Wal. Unlike her, it even became painful towards him at times. It was striking that he especially had to pay the price for Jesse Klaver, so much so that Klaver sometimes even seemed to regret his words towards Staghouwer. Yet politically speaking, no blood was shed here either. Real resistance can only be expected when the cabinet plans are discussed in the provinces. The provinces responded quite surprised to the cabinet's plans and did not know what to do with all the plans and maps.
Not asked
Because it was a mainline debate, Van der Wal was mainly concerned with the broad direction in which the various political parties also want. It was remarkable that - in a case where good substantiation is so important - the nitrogen minister was not asked further. In recent weeks, numerous substantiated critical studies on nitrogen have been presented. In particular, critical questioning regarding 'good conservation status' and the critical deposition value (KDW) attached to areas would have been obvious. It is understandable that the coalition parties do not want to give their ministers a leg up, but they also have no interest in new legislation being blown up again, as was previously the case with the Nitrogen Approach Program (a product, as is known, of Diederik Samson and LTO, among others). happened.
Difficulty with abnormal sound
On the day of the parliamentary debate, it emerged that D66 MP Tjeerd de Groot has so much difficulty with information that deviates from his commitment that he even scientists from their own supporters silenced if they don't talk up his alley. An overpowering focus on a predetermined end goal, without properly building the road to it, can lead to major accidents. And therefore also exemplary of the great distance in the entire nitrogen discussion between farmers, politicians and the green lobby.