Finally, thought Wim Wassink, CDA alderman in Winterswijk, when he read the statements of his party leader on Friday morning. “Better half turned than completely erred.”
CDA leader Wopke Hoekstra pleaded in the AD for a ‘restart of the process’ to reduce nitrogen emissions. “And there are no dogmas, 2030 is not sacred to us.” Hoekstra is referring to the deadline for achieving the nitrogen targets, agreed in the coalition agreement. It led to a big fight in the cabinet.
At least one sound is not heard among the 24 politically active CDA members who NRC spoke this weekend: that Hoekstra should not have made the statements. They rather think that the statements come too late or could have been firmer. Something has to be done for nature, is the tenor, but not in a way where the whole countryside loses faith in politics.
“We strive for perfection with the plans,” says Theo Helmers, CDA party chairman in the municipality of Berkelland, in the Achterhoek. “But it all still has to be accomplished. Because of the time pressure, people in the countryside feel threatened.”
Everyone at the table, and then discussing all subjects, can be heard back from many of the CDA members. “We should not be in too much of a hurry to look at nitrogen alone, that is not the solution,” says Maaike Prins, Member of Parliament in Friesland. “Look at water and climate as well.” And then there are the other crises that require attention. Peter Drenth, deputy in Gelderland, sums up: housing, asylum, climate, labor shortages, inflation. “I am happy that my party leader has concluded that something must be done about it.”
Dennis Heijnen, Member of Parliament in Noord-Holland, does not want to say that nature conservation has a lower priority. “A halving before 2030 is possible in many places. But if nitrogen reduction interferes with a vital countryside, you sometimes have to make a different decision.”
Other CDA members are fiercer than Heijnen. Diederik Boomsma, chairman of the Amsterdam council faction: „To stick rigidly to the nitrogen targets is unworldly. It’s bullshit, technocracy on steroids.” Boomsma wants nature conservation to stop relying on critical deposition values (KDWs), the levels at which nitrogen precipitation can cause nature damage.
Obstinately sticking to the nitrogen targets is unworldly. It’s bullshit, technocracy on steroids
Until now, criticism of the scientific basis of the nitrogen policy was mainly audible from more conservative parties such as the BoerBurgerBeweging (BBB), but Hoekstra also went along with it on Friday. He argued in favor of removing the KDWs from the law and instead creating an “ecological authority” to “objectively determine” what measures are needed.
Unrest in the ranks
The CDA previously expressed its doubts in The Hague about the government’s plans to reduce nitrogen emissions. Pieter Heerma, party leader in the House of Representatives, talked in June about “an adjustment” of the nitrogen plans. On closer inspection, it turned out that all his proposals were already in the plans of the cabinet.
Why does the party want to let go of the agreements now? Jaap Pegtel, CDA councilor in Schiedam, does not know either. “I would have preferred that the CDA had kept its feet up before the cabinet made a decision, but apparently criticism from the country is needed to get things right.”
The fact that the CDA in The Hague supported the line of the cabinet until Friday led to unrest in the local supporters. Willemien Wever, party leader of the CDA in Dronten: „You want to achieve the same goal together, but how do you achieve that goal if you put everyone in the harness against you? The protests can go on for a long time, and then you have elections.”
The CDA is shrinking in favor of the BBB in the polls. The provincial elections in March put extra pressure on the Christian Democrats to regain popularity. It makes Martijn Droog, councilor in Medemblik, doubt whether Hoekstra has made the right choice. “I think Wopke feels the hot breath on the neck of the BBB. But we also know the CDA as a governing party that takes responsibility and also delivers unwelcome messages. You do not enter into a coalition agreement for nothing.”
Of all CDA members that NRC spoke to, Droog is the least certain of his support for Hoekstra’s turn. “To say to a few heaps of manure on the highway, let’s do it differently soon, I don’t think that’s very strong.” But still: “Wopke knew that his statements would get in trouble in the coalition. In that sense, I fully understand a party leader who is serving different interests.”
Debate on Tuesday
It is still questionable to what extent Hoekstra’s statements really put a ‘bomb’ under nitrogen policy, such as the AD Friday wrote. D66 leader Sigrid Kaag said she had not read a formal request to break open the coalition agreement, and Hoekstra is still “fully convinced of the need to cut nitrogen emissions by half as soon as possible,” he later wrote. day on Twitter.
The relations in the coalition will become more clear during the debate on Hoekstra’s statements, which was inserted on Tuesday and for which the House of Representatives will return from recess earlier. According to Theo Helmers from the Achterhoek, Hoekstra “could have been visible a little earlier and shouted more firmly”, but he still thinks “the timing” of the interview is good. “This week the coalition is meeting, and under the skin everyone will try to strengthen their own position. Now it comes down to it.”
Also read: Major quarrel in cabinet after statements Hoekstra