Coercion or no coercion? After the nitrogen dossier, the coalition parties of Rutte IV are also divided about climate policy, now that extra measures are needed to achieve the cabinet’s climate target. The House of Representatives will debate it this Monday.
That the government must do more to achieve the agreed CO2reduction in 2030 was known. Recently, officials from various ministries therefore proposed scenarios to reduce the CO2emissions by at least 60 percent within seven years.
The additional task is not small. The required reduction between 1990 and 2030 is estimated at 110 megatons of CO2. Measures are still needed for 22 megatons, the report states.
Immediately after the coalition agreement, doubts were raised as to whether Rutte IV’s high climate target was achievable without hard rules and heavy pricing of climate damage. Eighteen months later, the four coalition parties must decide whether that will still happen.
This dilemma is particularly relevant in the industry. Agreements are now being made with the largest polluters in the Netherlands on how these companies can achieve the transition to a green industry. In a debate about these ‘tailor-made agreements’ two weeks ago, the same dividing lines emerged between D66 and the other coalition parties as with nitrogen. In the nitrogen dossier, D66 wants farmers to be forced to buy out as an option, while the rest continue to emphasize voluntariness in transforming the agricultural sector.
Read also: The Netherlands wants to reduce CO2 emissions through agreements with major polluters, but that is not yet so easy
Enforcing sustainability of large industrial companies, such as Tata Steel and fertilizer factory Yara, is a sensitive issue for VVD, CU and CDA. They point out that the requirements for the industry to become more sustainable, such as hydrogen factories and connection to the electricity grid, are not yet there and that the cabinet can therefore not set too strict requirements. They prefer to work on the basis of cooperation with the industry rather than coercion.
D66, on the other hand, does keep the possibility open for more binding policy: a higher C02levy can be “a stick behind the door” to greening, says Member of Parliament Raoul Boucke. The party is more skeptical about whether all current industry has a place in a sustainable future and expects something in exchange for the construction of infrastructure.
The party may refer to the official advisory report. Top civil servant Laura van Geest, chairman of the working group, stated in the House that it is necessary to have a higher CO as soon as possible2levy to meet the industry target.
Departing companies
D66’s plans for more extensive agreements and a higher CO2levy are met with resistance from VVD and CDA. And the CU doubts the effectiveness of a higher CO2-tax. Member of Parliament Pieter Grinwis calls that measure “a blunt axe”. According to Grinwis, companies would like to become more sustainable, but it sometimes takes years before they are connected to the electricity grid. “If the necessary energy infrastructure is not there, you can drive a company up costs with higher taxes, but that will not make it run any faster.”
Read also: Top civil servant: energy-intensive companies must pay for sustainability themselves
These voices can also be heard from the VVD and CDA factions, who fear that industrial companies will leave if the Dutch government imposes too many demands on them. Minister Micky Adriaansens (EZ, VVD) also let slip in the debate that he had little feeling for a higher CO2-tax. It is effective, she said, but puts “unimaginable pressure” on the industry. “The harder we push, the more we drive those companies out of the country.”
In February she would present a “national roadmap” for the industry, which would make it clear which industrial companies can accelerate their sustainability. Now Adriaansens says she wants to present the roadmap for the summer to the House.
More expensive airline tickets
Apart from industry, the largest task for sustainability lies with agriculture and traffic. The coalition parties now sound more united about the agricultural sector. The parties say that the Agricultural Agreement and the area plans of the provinces must first be awaited.
Furthermore, the political choices regarding aviation and car use are still open. Pricing for aircraft use or making electric cars mandatory is a sensitive issue for the VVD in particular. D66 does not want to spare any sector, but seems to be alone with the coalition parties.
The CDA wants “no panic measures” in response to the recent climate advice. The VVD agrees with that. “It is a reflex in The Hague to make more policy before the existing plans have been properly worked out,” says MP Silvio Erkens. Both parties point to the potential of insufficiently implemented government policy that the official report has not been able to fully include, such as a circular economy and the mixing of green gas with natural gas to limit emissions until 2030.
Henri Bontenbal (CDA): “If we do it right, we can produce several megatons of CO with green gas2 reduce. We’re not making it now. Then you can say: we are going to come up with a new measure. Or you say: how do we make it?” The CU also does not want a “flat barrel hunt”.
On the other side of the spectrum, GroenLinks and PvdA are pulling on D66 and the cabinet to actually achieve the objectives of the agreed climate policy. At election time, GL and PvdA warned that they would no longer support climate policy in the Senate if the cabinet did not deliver.
Minister for Climate and Energy Rob Jetten (D66) does not have much time after the debate. He is expected to present the additional climate measures within two weeks.
A version of this article also appeared in the newspaper of April 17, 2023.