ANP
–
Nature and environmental organizations do not want to negotiate the nitrogen targets with the cabinet. Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund, Nature and Environment, Natuurmonumenten and Mobilization for the Environment say to news hour that those goals cannot be achieved. After the farmers, they will soon be able to visit the discussion leader Johan Remkes to discuss the nitrogen approach with the cabinet.
–
One of the parties that visits Remkes is Greenpeace. “We are not going to give anything away. If ‘without taboos’ means that the cabinet plans will be weakened, then we have little business at the table,” says director Andy Palmen. “We come to think about the transition, but we are not sitting at the table to add water to the wine.”
–
Under Remkes’ leadership, the cabinet held an initial meeting with farmers’ organizations on Friday, including LTO. Afterwards, the farmers’ organization let it be known that there was some ‘movement’ in the cabinet, but that it is not yet sufficient.
–
Several farmers’ organizations want to change the timeline for nitrogen reduction. The cabinet wants to accelerate nitrogen reduction around vulnerable nature areas. The law states that this target must be achieved by 2035, but the government wants to change the law to achieve this target by 2030.
–
To weaken that goal is not a matter for nature organizations to discuss. They would prefer to see nitrogen emissions reduced even faster. “We cannot afford to wait any longer with reducing nitrogen. Nature simply cannot tolerate any delay anymore,” says Marjolein Demmers, director of Nature & Environment.
–
“What is extremely important is that there will be a moratorium (suspension) on new stables,” said Valentijn Wösten of Mobilization for the Environment. “It is inexplicable that you reserve 25 billion for, among other things, buying out farmers and at the same time allowing new stables.”
–
–
Greenpeace already summoned the government last year to take more measures to reduce nitrogen. It has not yet come to a lawsuit. “We see plans that are not sufficient for real restoration of nature. If the cabinet nibbles on this even further, we will go to court the day after,” says director Palmen.
–
As far as Greenpeace is concerned, the interpretation of the goals can be discussed. “We agree with LTO that the contribution of the large emitters such as Schiphol and Tata Steel should also be discussed.”
—
