The cabinet’s nitrogen plans are ‘the consequences of a super quicker’

It should be a bright spot for the cabinet, the news that NRC revealed on Monday: if the Netherlands fulfills all its climate agreements until 2030, this will provide an enormous bonus in nitrogen gains, which means that agriculture will have to reduce its emissions by a quarter to half. Nitrogen policy is squeaking and creaking, and demonstrators have been pressuring policymakers for weeks to adjust the targets. However, the cabinet mainly had to take criticism on Monday.

“You can see here the consequences of the super quickie that the cabinet wanted to make of it,” says independent Member of Parliament Pieter Omtzigt. Caroline van der Plas (BoerBurgerBeweging) is also irritated: “This is very bad for confidence, farmers now get the feeling that they have to be the child of the bill at all costs.”

It is all about the nitrogen target that the Rutte IV cabinet itself laid down in the coalition agreement. By 2030, 74 percent of the nitrogen-sensitive Natura 2000 nature must be so healthy that the so-called critical deposition value (KDW), a kind of thermometer for nitrogen damage, is not exceeded. To this end, the cabinet has drawn up a nitrogen target for agriculture and has instructed the provinces to take measures.

What was not included in all those calculations, reported NRC Monday, is how much nitrogen emissions are already decreasing due to the cabinet’s climate measures. Many of these measures, intended to significantly reduce greenhouse gases, yield significant nitrogen gains as a by-product. As a result, the remaining task can be reduced by up to half, as long as the cabinet actually achieves its climate targets. Although the Netherlands was a few percent behind the targets in 2021, the government seems keen to catch up.

Missed opportunity

The fact that this has not been taken into account earlier “is really a missed opportunity for the cabinet,” says Member of Parliament Derk Boswijk (CDA). Of all coalition parties, his party is perhaps struggling the most with the government’s nitrogen approach. “It could have made a difference locally,” he says, although he also says that the task remains “just very big”. “But more importantly: had you included these figures, it could have prevented a lot of unrest. There is a lot of miscommunication on this file.”

Also read Monday’s message: Ministry of Finance: ‘Less nitrogen reduction needed to achieve climate targets’

Pieter Omtzigt and Caroline van de Plas insisted on Monday that the internal official calculations be published as soon as possible and after that they want a debate on the consequences for the nitrogen plans presented earlier. They call it incomprehensible that the climate goals have not been included in the nitrogen map of Minister Christianne van der Wal (Nature and Nitrogen, VVD) and have not previously been shared with the House of Representatives. It is not yet clear whether a parliamentary majority wants to return so quickly from the summer recess that has just started.

Minister Sigrid Kaag (Finance, D66) mentioned the calculations in Brussels on Monday opposite The Telegraph “unfinished and incomplete”. The latter is correct: the ministry already showed this weekend NRC know that the definitive calculation model will be published this summer. Kaag further spoke of “an official calculation exercise” that is politically “not isolated”.

Choosing between solidarity and efficiency

It is no coincidence that the calculation comes from the Ministry of Finance and not from the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. There has been a dispute between the two departments of The Hague about the best way to tackle the nitrogen problem.

Agriculture prefers a strategy based on voluntary participation and a fair distribution of the most painful measures, even if that costs more money. Finance, on the other hand, insists on the most efficient and cheap solution, where the forced purchase of farms – expropriation – is less of a taboo.

In the coalition agreements of Rutte IV and the plans made so far, the soft hand of the Ministry of Agriculture can especially be recognized. There is a lot of money available and not entire areas are bought out in one fell swoop. Almost every farmer has to contribute to the solution, even if the reduction of nitrogen does not have the same effect everywhere.

‘Solidarity’, calls it Derk Boswijk, who is in favor of this strategy. “As a coalition, we have chosen to spread the assignment more broadly across the Netherlands. This means that you also reduce nitrogen in areas where it is not very efficient, but it does ensure that you can somewhat alleviate the pain in areas where it is really all hands on deck. Some form of agriculture is still possible there.”

The discussion does not end there. Finance officials have not been idle since the start of Rutte IV. Posted last month NRC about a study by the ministry that showed that a more efficient approach would affect far fewer farmers and cost half the current budget.

The now published calculation of Finance can also be read like this: by including the ‘nitrogen bonus’ of the climate targets, the cabinet can get the job done. And the exact size of that bonus depends in turn on the choice made by the cabinet. If it saves all farmers a little, even the largest emitters, then that already saves money. If, on the other hand, the bonus is used to spare the large group of small emitters, it can be much more efficient and cheaper. The nitrogen target for farmers could then be reduced by up to half.

Also read the opinion piece by Paul Bovend’Eert: Nitrogen plans Rutte IV: no respect for the rule of law

Omtzigt hopes that the cabinet will not “obstinately” stick to the nitrogen targets and the percentages mentioned for agriculture “now that the Ministry of Finance itself is disputing them”. According to the Member of Parliament, the state of affairs symbolizes the messy way in which the cabinet has made the nitrogen plans.

He points out that there is as yet no legal basis for the new nitrogen targets. Professor of constitutional law Paul Bovend’Eert of Radboud University in Nijmegen also complains about this in an opinion piece in NRC† According to Omtzigt, the cabinet should go back to the drawing board: “Take your time and come up with a new plan and a good law.”