The Groninger Gas Council, together with the Groninger Soil Movement, previously announced that it did not support the agreement between the government and the region. Now follows a more detailed explanation of that position.
The system is bankrupt
According to Gasberaad, the most important argument is that nothing is done about the system with a separation between claims handling and reinforcement and the many reinforcement regimes, counters and regulations.
“In our opinion, the system that has been built in recent years is bankrupt,” says Susan Top of the Gas Council. ‘Residents are driven mad by the bureaucracy, executive agencies cannot get a grip on schedules, litigation costs continue to rise and problems are handled administratively instead of solved.
In practice, the plans time and again get bogged down in stifling accountability rules, new protocols, advisory committees or regulations
She would rather have seen a real crisis approach, which is also urged by the State Supervision of Mines. Top: ‘By definition, a crisis approach means doing something different than what you are always used to doing.’
Good intentions on paper
According to the Gas Council, the problem is not in the plans, but in the implementation. “There is no shortage of good intentions on paper,” says Top.
‘But in practice, the plans time and again get bogged down in stifling accountability rules, new protocols, advisory committees or regulations and nothing really gets off the ground. The fact that the new accord has no answer to this makes it unbelievable for us. ‘
Is money disappearing back into the system?
The Gas Council is therefore afraid that a significant part of the one and a half billion euros will disappear into the system of experts, advice, committees, regulations and protocols. And therefore does not end up with the resident.
‘Our disappointment was great when it turned out that the parties to the administrative agreement had no ambition or intention to tackle precisely these elements. Many cupboards and walls can be built unintentionally on the basis of EUR 1.5 billion. ‘
Either way
The question is therefore how it should have been done according to the Gas Council. Top: ‘Our aim was a broad ambition to approach Groningen and the people of Groningen in the gas extraction area differently across the board. Not wait-and-see, but proactive. We come to you. Not from suspicion, but from trust. Not to explain, but to listen. ‘
What is needed to solve residents’ problems is an approach that is integral, inclusive and individual
‘What is needed to solve residents’ problems is an approach that is integral, inclusive and individual. All those three elements do not fit in the current system. ‘ For Gasberaad, integrated means one counter for claims handling, reinforcement and everything in between. Including is that everyone has the right to live safely in a damage-free home. Individual requires customization for the residents.
No clarity without a letter
The agreements between the ministries and the province and municipalities must ensure clarity for residents. Top does not yet see that clarity. ‘It would only have been really strong if everyone had received a letter today explaining what it means to him or her. Unfortunately, nobody knows what it means for them. ‘
Also read:
– Pride and worry alternate in political responses to 1.5 billion quakes
– ‘My damage is three tons. What am I supposed to do with 30,000 euros? ‘
– ‘This 1.5 billion is not the final amount. This is extra, it comes on top ‘
– .
