Saying that Schiphol has to shrink is one thing, arranging it is quite another. How will the government enforce that in a year’s time far fewer planes will take off and land in Amsterdam than before the pandemic? That is the central question that Minister Mark Harbers (Infrastructure and Water Management, VVD) must answer in the House of Representatives on Thursday.
Until well into the evening, the future of aviation in the Netherlands is central. The debate will undoubtedly be about the chaos at Schiphol. That is not over yet: staff shortages at security companies and ground handlers will force Schiphol to limit the number of passengers for months to come.
But it will also be the first debate on aviation on Thursday since Harbers’ announcement on 24 June that Schiphol must shrink. A historic announcement. Before that time, the airport was always allowed to grow. Or, as formulated in later years, ‘earn’ the growth by becoming cleaner and quieter.
The cabinet now wants to have a maximum number of flights at Schiphol of 440,000 per year from November 2023. That is 12 percent less than before Covid.
Fewer flights should above all mean less noise nuisance for local residents. Harbers must finally meet them. At the end of last year, the supervisor, the Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (ILT), warned that a group of residents of Aalsmeer was threatening to win a lawsuit against the government. The long-standing policy of tolerance for aircraft noise would no longer hold up in court.
The question is how the minister wants to flesh out his historic announcement. The headwind is blowing from all directions: from Brussels, from MPs, from KLM and Schiphol itself, and from the regulations. That wind seems so strong that it is uncertain whether the cabinet will meet the deadline of November 2023.
1. Europe
The decision to shrink is “without precedent”, said outgoing Schiphol president Dick Benschop on Wednesday in the RAI in Amsterdam. Benschop was one of the speakers at the international aviation conference World Aviation Festival.
As far as is known, no national government has ever attempted to restrict a major aviation hub in this way. According to Benschop, there is a lot of misunderstanding about this policy at the European Commission. “Airports in Europe have too little capacity. In that case, shrinkage does not make sense.”
The Commission is an important party in this dossier. A 2016 European regulation – on ‘noise-related operating restrictions’ – demands a balanced approach (balanced approach) of the nuisance. You have to try everything against noise – from triple home insulation to flight paths over quieter areas – before you can restrict an airport.
In response to parliamentary questions, Harbers wrote last month: “Reducing the number of aircraft movements is the only remaining possibility to reduce nuisance in the short term.” He now has to prove that in Brussels. That process must be completed in nine months, according to the minister.
2. Dutch politicians
Harbers needed fifty-eight A4 pages to answer all written questions in the run-up to the aviation debate. Many talked about the proposed contraction.
From left to right, the House still has many questions. For example, the VVD fears that shrinkage will cost a lot of jobs; that’s what some unions say. A number of pilots have announced that they will attend the debate in uniform on Thursday – in protest.
Member of parliament Raoul Boucke (D66) calls the contraction decision brave. “Harbers shows courage. He is taking a step that his predecessors never took.” But, he also asks, how did the minister arrive at those 440,000? And what happens after five years, when the term Harbers has mentioned for the restrictions is over? “We can’t go back to an aviation system that didn’t work.”
For Suzanne Kröger (GroenLinks), the announcement that Schiphol must shrink does not go far enough. She wants to have a say in which flights the airport should cancel. “That should be flights within 700 kilometers. You can replace it with the train. And all night flights. The question is: what kind of aviation do we want for the Netherlands?”
3. The aviation sector
The contraction decision is “dramatic for KLM”, said president Marjan Rintel already in June. Its airline provides half of all flights from Schiphol. Rintel (ex-NS) said at the World Aviation Festival that she is “disappointed” and “frustrated” with the decision.
The contraction would seriously undermine Schiphol’s hub function: KLM brings passengers from all over Europe together in Amsterdam and transports them further to America and Asia. Rintel: “The hub is of great importance for our international connection.”
KLM and Schiphol are working on an alternative plan to limit nuisance
According to Harbers, research commissioned by his ministry shows that the international connection of Schiphol also remains at the same level with 440,000 flights.
KLM and Schiphol are working on an alternative plan to limit nuisance and emissions. This involves cleaner aviation fuels and new and quieter aircraft. If KLM can take smarter flight routes over the Netherlands and Europe, this will also make a difference in noise and emissions.
4. The laws and regulations
Minister Harbers can temporarily fix the maximum of 440,000 flights in a ministerial regulation. But for the long term, he has to conclude a new ‘user agreement’ with Schiphol. This is called an airport traffic order.
Since 2015, it has not been possible to adopt a new LVB due to all kinds of administrative perils. Since 2019, there has been another problem: nitrogen. Schiphol must also limit its nitrogen emissions. The airport is close to a vulnerable dune area. Schiphol will only receive a nature permit once the airport has taken adequate measures against its nitrogen emissions. And that is necessary for an LVB.
The airport has now submitted a renewed application for a nature permit, based on the 440,000 flights. A spokesperson for the Ministry of Infrastructure expects the airport to receive a nature permit in time to be able to adopt a new LVB in 2024.