Parliament is not forcing the cabinet to change course in emission-free zones

The House of Representatives will not force the cabinet to restrict municipalities from setting up emission-free zones. That seems to be the most important conclusion of a new parliamentary debate on the issue. There has been talk for some time about zero-emission zones (areas in a city in which vans and trucks that emit harmful substances are banned). Fourteen municipalities will set up the zones as of January 1, including the five largest cities.

In October, the House urged a postponement for the entrepreneurs involved. But State Secretary Jansen came to the conclusion last month that there is not enough support for this among the municipalities and also in the cabinet. Moreover, the municipalities ultimately decide this themselves, he said several times.

He has asked the municipalities not to impose fines in the first year; the municipalities themselves do not want to go further than six months. Furthermore, entrepreneurs with the cleanest type of diesel vans will have access to city centers with a zero-emission zone until January 1, 2029 (according to an earlier plan, this was 2028).

A new motion by VVD and BBB to report every two months on the consequences of establishing the zones for entrepreneurs who cannot meet the requirements will probably be successful.

VVD MP Veltman said that the policy can be adjusted if the reports show that things are not going well. Jansen called that motion unnecessary in the debate, because he already plans to keep an eye on developments.

During the debate, the State Secretary received the harshest criticism from his own party, the PVV. It doesn’t see anything in the zones at all. MP Heutink spoke of a disaster that could cause more than 100,000 entrepreneurs to get into financial problems.

The PVV wants the cabinet to urgently come up with an order in council to postpone the introduction of the zones. A motion on this was co-signed by BBB, but will not reach a majority. And according to the State Secretary, the cure is worse than the disease in that proposal: “This causes additional uncertainty and ambiguity among entrepreneurs.”