There must be an emergency debate on Monday’s pilot light decision as soon as possible. That is what eight factions from the Provincial Council of Groningen want. “Two days of frost and we suddenly open the wells again.”
Member of Parliament Dries Zwart (Party for the North) is one of the petitioners. He was furious. “Like everyone in Groningen, I was very surprised and very angry. I am a Groninger myself, I live in the earthquake area. As petitioners, we really feel that this course of events is not right, with countless residents suffering from gas extraction and being cheated for years.”
According to Zwart, it could not have been the intention of the adoption decision that the pilot light could be turned on so easily. “It has been frost for two days and we open the wells again without any warning. I’m not convinced of the need to do that.”
Clarity about the pilot light decision
On Monday, State Secretary Vijlbrief (Mining) announced that the gas wells have been turned on again. It led to angry reactions in Groningen. Several members of Parliament were also angry when they heard the news. Now eight petitioners are requesting an emergency debate: they want clarity about the how and why of the pilot light decision.
The party members of the Party for the North, SP, CDA, BBB, Volt, PvdD, PvdA and GroenLinks want to know whether the Board of Provincial Executive was informed about the start-up of the gas locations and how communication from The Hague took place. They also want clarity about the protocol in extreme cold.
‘It fell completely raw on our roof’
Zwart points to the discussions that the Provincial Council held last summer in the run-up to the decision to reduce gas extraction to zero. “We were all strongly convinced at the time that we would only talk about a pilot light if there was a longer period of -6.5 degrees Celsius. It hit us completely hard that it is already happening. This is literally the fine print.”
If turning on the tap had been clearly communicated, Zwart might have thought differently. “If you simply announce it a week in advance, people are also angry, but at least they are informed. But that didn’t happen. That is why we want an explanation about the protocol and who decides on this. And why the Board was not informed.”
‘I don’t want doubts, but certainty’
Zwart also has questions about the reliability of the gas storage at Norg. Only if this were to disappear would extraction at the two gas wells near Zuidbroek be resumed. “Apparently there is real doubt as to whether you can use the gas supply at Norg in cold temperatures. I don’t want doubts about that, but certainty. Otherwise you can always keep the gas tap open.”
The decision to open the gas tap again has also shocked co-applicant Laura Reinink (Volt). “This destroys all trust again. We are not so much angry that the pilot light comes on, but that this just happens after two days of cold.”
‘I’m not a weatherman, but this is what it’s like waiting for it to happen again’
According to Reinink, transparency is needed. “No one assumed that the perceived temperature and wind apparently play a role and not just the actual temperature. This was not clearly communicated at the time. I want clarity about the interpretation of the adoption decision. I’m not a weatherman, but if you calculate like that, you have to wait until it happens again this winter.”
Reinink is also disappointed by the lack of clear communication. “I had to read it in the news, it was not communicated through political channels. And when it gets very cold, you hiccup with it for a few days. Then you could also have said: guys, pay attention, maybe that pilot light needs to be turned on again. Send a signal to us in Groningen, so that we know where we stand. That really needs to be improved.”
The party leaders will meet on Wednesday morning to discuss when the emergency debate will take place.