Main Edition
US
FR
July 21, 2023 - 5:30pm
EU climate commissioner Frans Timmermans, the mastermind behind so many of Brussels’s recent green policies, has this week announced his intention to run in the Dutch elections in November. This vote, outwardly routine, might be the most consequential for the EU in decades. Usually, European elections are a choice between Left-wing and Right-wing parties, but in the Netherlands, it could become a referendum on the legitimacy of the EU’s Green Deal and other environmental policies.
In the past, the Dutch electoral spotlight has been hogged by Geert Wilders and his Party for Freedom (PVV), an economically liberal but otherwise Right-wing political movement with particularly strong opposition to uncontrolled immigration. This time, however, the attention focuses on the Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB) led by Caroline van der Plas since its founding in 2019.
The party has come into existence as a direct reaction to the numerous environmental laws its supporters consider a direct threat to the viability of Dutch farmers, who are among the most technologically advanced and productive in the world. Measured by the number of exports, the Netherlands is the world’s second largest agricultural player, after the United States.
The previous government, under Mark Rutte, underestimated the appeal the issue would carry beyond the farming industry, and he and other parties were completely blindsided by the BBB’s victory in provincial elections earlier this year. The Farmer-Citizen Movement has been called many things, from left-of-centre to far-Right. Regardless of its exact situation on the political spectrum, it represents a backlash against the perceived environmental overreach of Left-wing parties and EU bureaucrats in Brussels.
Here’s where Timmermans’s entry into the race becomes particularly crucial. He is set to run for the position of leader of the combined Labour and Green Left parties, making him the epitome of everything the BBB stands against. According to the most recent polling, this coalition party is at 18% and the BBB at 16%, setting the stage for an intense campaigning season over the next few months.
Timmermans has repeatedly clashed with the European People’s Party (which represents centre-right members of the European Parliament) over plans for nature restoration laws and other proposals to push back against agricultural activities. Although it is only admitted beyond closed doors, European conservatives are sensing the growing public resistance to particularly zealous climate policies. Obsessing over Net Zero, as well as plans to kill 200,000 cows in Ireland in the name of climate change, is now viewed with renewed scepticism. As the recent UK by-elections have shown, anger against environmental overreach like London’s Ultra Low Emissions Zones (Ulez) can help a flailing conservative party to hold on to a few seats amidst a sea of losses.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI hope the BBB has expanded its message beyond just farmers. Net zero will have implications for everyone, but most consequential for low-income earners. And beyond net zero, the BBB can’t be a one-issue party.
I hope the BBB has expanded its message beyond just farmers. Net zero will have implications for everyone, but most consequential for low-income earners. And beyond net zero, the BBB can’t be a one-issue party.
Anything the Left disagrees with is automatically labelled far-Right. Such a lack of imagination.
Anything the Left disagrees with is automatically labelled far-Right. Such a lack of imagination.
The hollowing out of small farm communities in the US snapped up by big corporations and Uber rich individuals.
The witch hunt against private farmers by government led practices worldwide for the mythical pursuit of the great green future.
In 2001 I went to the Ukraine and was informed whilst there that during communist times the few privately run micro farmers (less than 20%) produced nearly 80% of the produce.
From china to soviet Russia the list of failures of over centralised agriculture has starved millions over the last century, you’d really think this is yet more badly thought out social engineering that looks good on a PowerPoint somewhere by some insidious cabal.
I come from farming stock in Ireland and south west UK.
Small farmers do it better dummies.
Yes, but that is far from the situation in the modern West, where the big intensive farms produce by far the majority of the food.
Yes, but that is far from the situation in the modern West, where the big intensive farms produce by far the majority of the food.
The hollowing out of small farm communities in the US snapped up by big corporations and Uber rich individuals.
The witch hunt against private farmers by government led practices worldwide for the mythical pursuit of the great green future.
In 2001 I went to the Ukraine and was informed whilst there that during communist times the few privately run micro farmers (less than 20%) produced nearly 80% of the produce.
From china to soviet Russia the list of failures of over centralised agriculture has starved millions over the last century, you’d really think this is yet more badly thought out social engineering that looks good on a PowerPoint somewhere by some insidious cabal.
I come from farming stock in Ireland and south west UK.
Small farmers do it better dummies.
Here we go again. 3 comments, 1 visible. Absolute shtshow.
That’s one thing we can agree on.
So yet again it seems, comments that don’t sit well with the narrative are suppressed for the period during which the article is most discussed. Think I’m done here tbh.
I don’t think it has anything to do with the narrative. We diverge strongly on this issue and we’ve both had comments disappear. I’m not sure what it is. Maybe they’re trying to prevent an escalation of words? I don’t know, but but I don’t like it.
I’m very surprised by the low number of comments in this subject. Unusual to say the least.
I think it’s technical error rather than human. The comments disappear and then reappear. I’ve even noticed that some of my comments appear on my iPad but not on my computer, for instance. Not sure what is going on, but I doubt that they’re disappearing because of you not toeing some ideological line.
I don’t think it has anything to do with the narrative. We diverge strongly on this issue and we’ve both had comments disappear. I’m not sure what it is. Maybe they’re trying to prevent an escalation of words? I don’t know, but but I don’t like it.
I’m very surprised by the low number of comments in this subject. Unusual to say the least.
I think it’s technical error rather than human. The comments disappear and then reappear. I’ve even noticed that some of my comments appear on my iPad but not on my computer, for instance. Not sure what is going on, but I doubt that they’re disappearing because of you not toeing some ideological line.
So yet again it seems, comments that don’t sit well with the narrative are suppressed for the period during which the article is most discussed. Think I’m done here tbh.
That’s one thing we can agree on.
Here we go again. 3 comments, 1 visible. Absolute shtshow.
Test
Test
Astronauts typically express awe and even love for the beautiful Earth below while they’re in orbit. I wonder how they feel when seeing the immense consequential pollution from raging massive forest/brush fires, like the one currently consuming much of Quebec and fouling American air, basically due to human-caused global warming?
One wonders: If a large portion of the planet’s most freely-polluting corporate CEOs, governing leaders and over-consuming/disposing individuals rocketed far enough above the earth for a day’s (or more) orbit, while looking down, would have a sufficiently profound effect on them to change their apparently unconditional political/financial support of Big Fossil Fuel? …
I myself was left feeling I could never again complain about the weather being too cold after having suffered the unprecedented heatwave here in late June 2021, described by meteorologists as a ‘stalling dome’ of high heat, that resulted in 619 confirmed heat-related deaths.
But then complain I did when most of the province, including southwestern B.C., suffered an unprecedently cold bunch of days in January, which was described by meteorologists as a ‘stalling dome’ of freezing cold.
I doubt it was just coincidental; rather, such extremes are basically due to climate change via human-caused global warming via morbidly massive amounts of fossil fuel consumption ever since the Industrial Revolution.
Basic commonsense dictates that it is no longer prudent to have so much of society, including our primary modes of transportation, reliant on traditional sources of energy.
Yet, if the universal availability of green-energy alternatives will come at the profit-margin expense of traditional ‘energy’ production companies, one can expect formidable obstacles, including the political and regulatory sort.
In this world, if something notably conflicts with corporate interests, even very progressive motions are greatly resisted, often enough successfully.
The number of people dying from extreme climate events is vastly less than a century ago, even in countries like Bangladesh. How many Dutch people are drowning in the rising seas?
The bad fossil fuel people deliberately destroying the planet! That is just a silly analysis. The world is highly dependent on fossil fuels and will be for the foreseeable future. Hence Joe Biden begging the Saudis to produce more oil. There simply aren’t the green energy alternatives available. We generate significant electrical power with solar and wind generation for example, but that amounts to less than 20% of energy consumption. And agriculture, which feeds us all, is essentially 100% dependent on fossil fuels, both for transport and other energy requirements and for fertiliser.
Our main priority is to adapt – and we are already doing so. (This also has the advantage that we don’t have to argue about who or what is causing the warning). The measures to directly reduce carbon emissions are vastly inefficient, verging on useless, even in achieving the goals they set out to achieve, as Bjorn Lomborg so convincingly argues. Paint roofs white, plant more trees and grass as one example is a vastly better and more cost effective way of cooling cities, for example, than introducing a fleet of electric buses. Polar bear numbers are hugely more influenced by hunting than by warming. Etc etc.
Just so you know, around 10 times as many people die from extreme cold as die from extreme heat.
I myself was left feeling I could never again complain about the weather being too cold after having suffered the unprecedented heatwave here in late June 2021, described by meteorologists as a ‘stalling dome’ of high heat, that resulted in 619 confirmed heat-related deaths.
But then complain I did when most of the province, including southwestern B.C., suffered an unprecedently cold bunch of days in January, which was described by meteorologists as a ‘stalling dome’ of freezing cold.
I doubt it was just coincidental; rather, such extremes are basically due to climate change via human-caused global warming via morbidly massive amounts of fossil fuel consumption ever since the Industrial Revolution.
Basic commonsense dictates that it is no longer prudent to have so much of society, including our primary modes of transportation, reliant on traditional sources of energy.
Yet, if the universal availability of green-energy alternatives will come at the profit-margin expense of traditional ‘energy’ production companies, one can expect formidable obstacles, including the political and regulatory sort.
In this world, if something notably conflicts with corporate interests, even very progressive motions are greatly resisted, often enough successfully.
Typical hyperbole. Ireland do not want to ‘kill 200,000 cows’. They want to reduce the herd by 10% over a long period. The context of that is Ireland has 2.3 million more cows than people.
It’s the same underlying issue as the Dutch farmers – over production, over consumption and over pollution and it has to be reformed.
“The context of that is Ireland has 2.3 million more cows than people.”
The solution is obvious! Let the cow live and have more children!
The plan in Ireland is to reduce the number of cows and then import beef from Brazil. genius plan you green fools
A comparison of the cow with the human population is hardly germane to the issue, or indeed any issue. Perhaps let’s reduce the human population? The other points are vague to the point of meaninglessness.
If Ireland thinks this is an emergency it should perhaps actually be killing those 200,000 cows – reducing the herd over a long period hardly seems to speak of an emergency. 10% – what is the logic or science behind that?
I love the “over consumption” point, of course which always made by those who do most of the over consuming, which is affluent westerners! I’m not going to take that flight. I’ll just buy a load of new stuff instead…..
“The context of that is Ireland has 2.3 million more cows than people.”
The solution is obvious! Let the cow live and have more children!
The plan in Ireland is to reduce the number of cows and then import beef from Brazil. genius plan you green fools
A comparison of the cow with the human population is hardly germane to the issue, or indeed any issue. Perhaps let’s reduce the human population? The other points are vague to the point of meaninglessness.
If Ireland thinks this is an emergency it should perhaps actually be killing those 200,000 cows – reducing the herd over a long period hardly seems to speak of an emergency. 10% – what is the logic or science behind that?
I love the “over consumption” point, of course which always made by those who do most of the over consuming, which is affluent westerners! I’m not going to take that flight. I’ll just buy a load of new stuff instead…..
Typical hyperbole. Ireland do not want to ‘kill 200,000 cows’. They want to reduce the herd by 10% over a long period. The context of that is Ireland has 2.3 million more cows than people.
It’s the same underlying issue as the Dutch farmers – over production, over consumption and over pollution and it has to be reformed.