Things can go fast in the farming world. One week, Mark van den Oever of farmers’ action group Farmers Defense Force (FDF) scolds a fellow negotiator, and in a vlog farmers lobby organization LTO calls a club of traitors with “a garden hose backbone”, because LTO did want to start a conversation with the cabinet. and mediator Johan Remkes on nitrogen policy.
Seven days later, the two organizations came out in unison, and LTO leader Sjaak van der Tak was allowed to talk to Remkes cs on behalf of a large part of the sector through a kind of farmers’ union without a name.
In a statement published on Wednesday – LTO, FDF and six other farmers’ organizations – together they say they account for 90 percent of the sector – state that the interest groups are “on the same page” again and are working together against the government’s nitrogen plans.
They think they go too far. By 2030, nitrogen emissions should be halved. Minister of Nature and Nitrogen Christianne van der Wal (VVD) presented a map in June showing per region how much emissions should be reduced in agriculture: in some provinces more than half, around nature areas sometimes up to eighty percent. In order to achieve these goals, the agricultural sector must shrink significantly. These organizations want to try to prevent that together.
The ‘farmers’ union without a name’ evokes memories of 2019, when on November 5, thirteen agricultural organizations also founded an alliance: the Agricultural Collective. Then LTO exulted that a “unique alliance” would help the Empire and the provinces “break the nitrogen deadlock”. After less than half a year, the collective fell apart. It did not work, LTO said at the time, the “diversity” of the organizations ‘into a straitjacket’.
Farmers’ squabbling
Now there are five less interest groups, but the differences remain. And the tension has only increased since it became known how big the task for agriculture is.
The past few months have been turbulent, with many farmers’ protests, sometimes even threats from the sector. LTO, the largest farmers’ advocacy organization (about 30,000 members, they say) is moderate and expressly distances itself from fierce and sometimes dangerous farmers’ protests. LTO has traditionally held an important position in the polder consultations and may be more inclined to compromise.
Farmers Defense Force and Agractie are more radical in tone and take less distance from fierce protests. Every now and then the FDF leader attacks LTO. He thinks LTO is too mild and too willing to talk to ‘The Hague’.
And although the eight interest groups mainly try to radiate unity to the outside world, in the days before the joint statement there was still bickering among themselves about who could or could not participate in the consultation between the interest groups last Wednesday.
Read alsoWhat room does Johan Remkes have to accommodate the farmers?
Yet it is not entirely a surprise that the eight parties are now working together. The peasant supporters are pushing for unity, to form one front together against ‘The Hague’. This is also sensible in any negotiations, because then the different groups can be separated from each other less easily. In addition, the following applies: the fewer parties, the more concrete the talks. Or, as one agriculturist says, “Keep it wide, and you won’t give a shit.”
Organic and circular farmers
Moreover, the eight farmers’ organizations were upset that if they themselves did not join in, their interests would be represented by much smaller associations of organic and circular farmers, which together only cover a very small part of the sector. They wanted to prevent that.
Broadly speaking, the participants of the ‘farmers’ union without a name’ think the same about current policy: trust in the government has fallen below zero, which must first be restored before any substantive talks are started. The nitrogen policy is unrealistic and the targets set far too firm. Moreover, the emphasis is too much on buying out farmers, or worse: expropriation.
If it comes to negotiations, they will argue in favor of lowering the nitrogen targets and shifting them to 2035. The four coalition parties have so far insisted that those targets will not be adjusted. In addition, more money and (legal) attention must be paid to innovative solutions to reduce nitrogen emissions. For example, it is still taking too long, the eight organizations believe, for technical solutions, such as air scrubbers or other systems for farm sheds, to be officially recognised.
A lot at stake for cabinet too
The fact that LTO leader Sjaak van der Tak speaks on behalf of the eight organizations is a great opportunity for LTO to still leave its mark on nitrogen policy, as the lobby club has done so often in recent decades. In this way LTO can show its members that it is still the largest and most influential farmers’ organization in the Netherlands.
Should the conversation fail, LTO will have to absorb the blows as a party that messed up – although LTO itself will in that case mainly emphasize that it also had to negotiate on behalf of the seven other parties.
There is also a lot at stake for the government. If the delegation that will be there on Friday cannot be reached, there is a good chance that the farmers’ interest groups will not allow themselves to be tempted into a conversation again in the near future.
One thing is already clear: to solve the nitrogen problem quickly, effectively and relatively painlessly, it is wise to have the farmers on board. If this does not work, it will open the door to stronger and more radical protest.