The Cabinet has known for weeks that Brussels does not accept Dutch manure policy

Minister Adema returned headlong from abroad on Friday for urgent consultations about Brussels’ criticism of Dutch manure policy, but the cabinet had known for weeks that there was a good chance that the Netherlands would no longer receive any exemptions from Europe for spreading manure. In a letter in the hands of the NOS, European Commissioner Virginijus Sinkevicius already warned in mid-December that the Netherlands is too optimistic.

In a letter dated December 19, Sinkevicius writes that he is concerned whether the Netherlands will meet all the conditions to qualify for the slower phasing out of manure spreading. He says he is concerned about a letter from Adema to the House of 2 December, which gives the impression that farmers have more time and more options than agreed. The Commissioner points out that if the Netherlands does not meet the requirements will suffice, the exceptional position disappears.

There are disapproving signals in the Chamber. Also because the minister pretended in a debate that people did not have to worry about what Brussels thinks.

Europe previously decided that spreading manure must be restrained to achieve environmental goals for water quality.

In a debate on December 20, a day after the concerned letter from European Commissioner Sinkevicius, D66 MP De Groot says that he hears concerns from Brussels and asks the minister how he sees this because the Netherlands “formally does not comply with the derogation decision” . Adema tells the House that the conversation “is about that” and there is “no reason for great concern”.

But you could deduce those concerns from the letter of the day before:

The Ministry of Agriculture says that Adema “officially received” the letter on December 19, but did not read it before the debate on December 20. During the debate, the minister thought he could still “convince” the committee in “follow-up talks”.

MPs from both the coalition and the opposition want an explanation in a debate next Wednesday, and want to receive the letter from European Commissioner Sinkevicius for that debate.

VVD Member of Parliament Van Campen calls it “appreciative that the minister looked into the feasibility of changing the rules for farmers” but says that “this should never be at the expense of the hard-won derogation. The derogation has therefore been put in jeopardy.”

“The VVD did not know that the transition year announced by the cabinet was reported to the House without an agreement from the European Commission. Farmers are now saddled with false hope. We are fed up with this,” says Van Campen.

D66 MP De Groot would have thought it “nice” if Adema had “corrected” the initial answer from the debate that there was no cause for concern. “That would also have been relevant for farmers, because then they could have prepared for a month longer. Now they are faced with a fait accompli at the very last moment.”

VVD member Van Campen believes that farmers should be able to count on a reliable government. “That trust has been damaged here again.”

BBB leader Van der Plas says that this letter should have been sent “directly to the Chamber” in December. That also made a difference for the farmers, she says.

For GroenLinks, the question of trust plays a role. “Very serious that the minister seems to have been blind to the message from Brussels. Half-truths damage confidence in the government,” said MP Bromet.