Planning Bureau: new cabinet, get started on these headache files quickly

This is what director Marko Hekkert of the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency said to RTL News.

These three core questions touch on all kinds of other topics. For example, whether people in new homes will keep their feet dry, given the increase in extreme weather, and how they will travel.

The extent to which politicians want to move forward with climate policy will have major consequences for businesses and citizens. And it must also be clear how tackling nitrogen not only has consequences for farmers, but also for whether people will eat different food.

The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (PBL) is the government’s most important advisor in these areas. Earlier this fall, it noted that there is now a climate crisis, a nitrogen crisis and a housing crisis.

The PBL then wondered whether politicians only become interested in the living environment when problems have developed into a crisis. A bad thing, according to PBL, because a crisis can also lead to hasty choices and possibly not the best policy.

No vision

To prevent politics from rolling from incident to incident, a new cabinet will have to quickly get to work on ‘the major challenges of our time’. “There are so many things that need to be done,” says Hekkert. “While there is no overarching vision on how the Netherlands can be made future-proof.”

If climate change continues, you don’t want to have homes in places where people are at too much risk of flooding, Hekkert explains. The recent threat that a new residential area near Amsterdam could be flooded is an example of this.

The question of how ambitious a new government wants to be with climate policy also has major consequences for citizens and companies. For example, the question of whether flying is being restricted, the extent to which car use is taxed more instead of car ownership or the extent to which investments are being made in more public transport.

Nitrogen also remains a major problem. “You don’t hear much about it in this election campaign, but that doesn’t mean the problem has gone away. It won’t go away.” As far as Hekkert is concerned, an answer will mainly have to be given to the question of whether agriculture can continue to be a sector that produces a lot for export and is dependent on the import of animal feed elsewhere.

Uncertain future

“Farmers now produce a lot of milk and meat, largely for abroad. If those exports become less important, agricultural land can offer more space for cultural landscape or other crops such as beans, lupine or other protein-rich products.” Lupine is a protein-rich legume used in meat substitutes.

What the future will look like for farmers is still largely unknown. “That is why there was no agricultural agreement, farmers simply did not see what the future could look like.”

Different revenue model

The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency analyzed a number of party programmes, mainly from left-wing parties and the VVD. In all these programs, the number of animals in the livestock sector is shrinking. “But that is only possible if farmers are given a completely different revenue model or if consumers start paying more. It is quite logical that farmers wonder: how will I earn my money in the future?”

Although many other political parties have stated in their election manifesto that the livestock herd must shrink, they keep a much more low profile. Yet, according to Hekkert, politicians should think about it, because the possible changes in agriculture could also mean quite a bit for the consumer. Politicians must therefore determine to what extent they want to involve citizens in this. Will people’s diets really change in the future?

The Planning Bureau proposed the introduction of a meat tax years ago. But, says Hekkert: “You see that politicians have a lot of difficulty with this, for example by taxing meat extra and encouraging other foodstuffs. So far, very little has been done in this area.”