Ombudsman calls government unreliable for farmers
Changing rules and delayed decisions have left farmers and their families uncertain for years.
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
The National Ombudsman concludes that the government has failed to act reliably enough towards farmers over the past ten years. The judgement follows conversations with 32 farmers and comes a day after the cabinet presented a new nitrogen policy.
According to Ombudsman Reinier van Zutphen, farmers faced rules that changed, contradicted one another or remained unclear for long periods. These concerned nitrogen, manure, nature, water and animal welfare, among other things. As a result, farmers found it difficult, the ombudsman says, to plan investments, sustainability measures and the succession of their businesses.
The uncertainty was not limited to running the business. The conversations showed that work and private life are often closely intertwined in farming families. Differing views on continuing, stopping or adapting the business could therefore also cause tension within families.
The ombudsman focused the investigation on farmers’ experiences. Since 2019, the ombudsman has spoken to 32 farmers from different parts of the country and from both organic and conventional agriculture. Interest groups, academics, Natuurmonumenten and other experts were also consulted. The farmers’ accounts were not individually verified, the ombudsman says; the report mainly looks for recurring patterns in their experiences.
Van Zutphen advises the government to set long-term objectives and stick to them. The Minister of Agriculture should also take greater control, so that rules and plans drawn up by central government, provinces and other authorities are better aligned. Farmers’ knowledge should also play a greater role in policy decisions, according to the ombudsman.
On Tuesday, the cabinet presented a new nitrogen package with emissions targets for each sector, area-based rules and support for farmers who want to innovate, farm less intensively, relocate or stop. The cabinet says it will make a large part of €20 billion available for this; for measures in zones around vulnerable nature areas, it cites more than €9 billion. According to the cabinet, the approach should make it possible once again to issue permits for agriculture, housing and other activities.
The policy direction has therefore changed, but the uncertainty has not immediately disappeared. The bill still has to pass the Lower and Upper Houses of Parliament. In addition, provinces must draw up plans for nature zones by September 2028 at the latest, and various schemes are still being developed. The ombudsman is calling for clear, coherent and predictable government policy.
The report’s central point is therefore not that every decision made over the past ten years was unlawful. The ombudsman does argue that successive changes and poor communication have caused uncertainty to accumulate for farmers. The question for the cabinet is whether the announced support and long-term objectives will provide enough stability to repair that breach of trust.
Also show where in Europe and in the world
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The National Ombudsman concludes that changing and contradictory rules have caused farmers prolonged uncertainty.
- On 3 November 2026, the cabinet presented a new nitrogen policy with sectoral emissions targets, area-based measures and financial support.
- The cabinet’s plan has not yet been definitively approved by Parliament.
Left
Arguments The government must set clear limits on emissions and legally safeguard nature restoration. Farmers who have to change as a result deserve public support, but that support must not mean that necessary environmental measures are postponed again.
Values Nature protection, public responsibility, legal certainty and a fair distribution of costs.
Consequences A consistent approach could make permits and nature restoration possible in the long term, but it requires far-reaching changes from farming businesses now.
Centre
Arguments Farmers need long-term clarity, while policy must remain legally workable and ecologically effective. Sectoral targets, area-based tailoring and independent monitoring could create room for compromise.
Values Administrative reliability, feasibility, consultation and protection of the public interest.
Consequences A stable package could support investment and the issuing of permits, but only if central government, provinces and sectors actually implement their agreements.
Right
Arguments The ombudsman confirms that successive cabinets have burdened farmers with changing policy and uncertainty. The government must now prescribe less, allow more room for entrepreneurship and ensure that rules are not repeatedly changed.
Values Property, entrepreneurship, local autonomy and predictability in government.
Consequences More freedom for farmers could promote innovation and business continuity, but without firm oversight there is a risk that nature targets will not be met.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The main claims can be found directly in reporting by NOS and information from the National Ombudsman. The description of the cabinet’s plan was checked against the Rijksoverheid report; the limitations of the investigation are explicitly mentioned.
- confirmed The National Ombudsman calls the government insufficiently reliable towards farmers over the past ten years. — This appears in NOS’s account of the ombudsman’s conclusions. source
- confirmed The ombudsman spoke to 32 farmers from different parts of the country and from different agricultural sectors. — NOS gives the number and spread of the conversations. source
- confirmed The investigation also included conversations with interest groups, academics and other experts. — These groups are mentioned in NOS’s summary and on the investigation page. source
- confirmed On 3 November 2026, the cabinet presented a nitrogen policy with emissions targets for each sector. — This appears in the official Rijksoverheid news report. source
- confirmed The cabinet cites €20 billion for the policy and more than €9 billion for measures in zones around vulnerable nature areas. — Both amounts appear in the cabinet’s report. source
- confirmed The bill still has to pass the Lower and Upper Houses of Parliament. — Rijksoverheid says the cabinet is sending the bill to the Lower House; parliamentary consideration is therefore not yet complete. source
- confirmed The experiences of the interviewed farmers were not individually verified. — This is explicitly stated in NOS’s description of the research method. source
Editor's note
It is certain that the National Ombudsman based his conclusions on conversations with 32 farmers and other stakeholders, and that the cabinet presented a new nitrogen policy on 3 November. It remains uncertain how broadly the experiences of the interviewed farmers are representative; the ombudsman says their accounts were not individually verified.Sources
- Overheid was onbetrouwbaar voor boeren, zegt Nationale ombudsman — NOS
- Ervaringen van boeren — Nationale ombudsman
- Kabinet legt stikstofaanpak vast en zet steun voor boeren klaar — Rijksoverheid
More on this in Dutch media
- Het Parool — „boeren landbouw”
- Trouw — „boeren landbouw”
- NRC — „boeren landbouw”