It is still unclear which direction exactly Maastricht Aachen Airport (MAA) is heading.
In a state committee, only CDA, PVV and 50Plus already spoke out in favor of keeping the airport in Beek open. Lokaal-Limburg was also in favor of this because of employment opportunities, but at the same time argued for an airport that is as small as possible that causes as little nuisance as possible.
Closure
VVD, SVL, SP, Forum for Democracy and PvdA mainly asked a whole series of questions or set clear conditions. D66 spoke out in favor of postponing the decision-making process on 3 June. GroenLinks and the Party for the Animals remained in principle in favor of closing MAA. The Palmen one-person faction (ex-CDA) joined in.
The meeting of the state committee on Friday went very differently than expected. Due to the start time of 13:00 and the fact that the 22 speakers spoke for almost four hours, including questions from parliamentarians, they did not get further than the first term of the Limburg Parliament. It was decided to continue the meeting next Friday.
Commitments
VVD and SVL hold the key to ensuring a majority for keeping MAA open. VVD member of parliament Teun Heldens once again made it clear that past commitments to keep MAA open weigh heavily for his party. At the same time, he thought the scenarios on the table were poorly developed and he wanted some kind of guarantee for various risks. For example, about the participation of Schiphol or the government in MAA and clarity about whether the nitrogen rules can stand in the way of a nature permit for the airport. Like many other parties, he spoke out in favor of a much broader fund for measures to prevent nuisance for residents in the cores right next to MAA. Nearly 9 million has now been earmarked for this. “In any case, the VVD has not decided yet. We would like to keep the airport open, but we are done with the enormous financial burden for the province,” said Heldens.
Also read: Members of parliament under pressure because of MAA: ‘It hangs over the head’
Anti-climax
States member Marcel Thewissen of SVL also wanted clearer figures. He mentioned the information from the Schiphol Group that it does want to cooperate with MAA but only wants to decide later how exactly an anti-climax. For SVL, the choice must be between keeping open or closing without precise scenarios. “We should not sit in the chair of the management,” said Thewissen. Which is in favor of recording a maximum number of people who are hindered.
Nitrogen
The PvdA mainly wanted clarification about all kinds of costs that would not have been included in the various growth scenarios. And just like the VVD, clarity about possible nitrogen rules and problems. “They can frustrate developments elsewhere”, states member of parliament Aleida Berghorst. Forum for Democracy also did not want to comment on closing or keeping it open. But stated that he had a major problem with all Limburgers paying at an airport from which not all of them benefit. The SP agreed with the VVD that there was actually no well-developed scenario on the table.
“We need much more guarantees and certainties and robust sanctions if agreed measures are not taken,” said SP party leader Marc van Caldenberg. D66 described the three scenarios for keeping MAA open as mainly muddling through in the same direction as now. D66 member of parliament Hans van Wageningen found it acceptable that the postponement of a decision means that the construction of a new runway, which is necessary for safety reasons, cannot continue for the time being. Even if the consequence is that it may temporarily not be possible to fly. According to D66, a postponement also offers room for a referendum on MAA.
Scenarios
CDA, PVV, SVL and SP also felt that the provincial government should come up with a concrete proposal itself and should not leave it to the Limburg Parliament. “MAA is a free issue. But only for us. Not for the full-time administrators of the provincial government. We value their quality to make an integral assessment,” said CDA member of parliament Wouter IJpelaar. Incidentally, no party had so far requested this in the countless sessions about MAA. While it was known that the provincial government would only work out the four scenarios.
According to Thursday, there will be a committee meeting in the House of Representatives on aviation, at which MAA may also be discussed. On 25 May, the Limburg Parliament will have a closed meeting with the Schiphol Group.