The Senate discussed with Minister Madlener about changes in water board levies to better apply the beneficiary principle: those who benefit pay. The debate included implementation feasibility and timely evaluation. The Senate will vote on February 4.
A motion was submitted:
- -The Van Langen-Visbeek motion on postponing mandatory tariff differentiation was discouraged by the minister.
Senator Thijssen (GroenLinks-PvdA), also representing D66 and OPNL, expressed concerns about the laws feasibility. The proposal might complicate cost allocation. She inquired about steps for a fairer levy system.
For VVD, this bill is logical, said Senator Klip-Martin. Water boards are responsible for water quality and safety, and levying is stringent. Boards can allocate more costs to those benefiting more.
Senator Holterhues (ChristenUnie) emphasized future-proofing water boards. The OECD supports beneficiary principle reform. He asked how the bill accounts for boards without direct water barriers.
Senator Van Kesteren (PVV) prioritized primary water management and preventing significant levy increases. Determining who pays might increase administrative costs, potentially raising levies.
Senator Rietkerk (CDA) noted current tax system issues partly resolved by this bill. He supports proposals to adapt purification levies, reducing human and environmental impact.
Senator De Vries (SGP) was supportive but cautious. Water boards add safety value, even if not cost-efficient. SGP warned against only economic valuation of board contributions.
Senator Van Langen-Visbeek (BBB) questioned benefit allocation. Households pay more, while farms and businesses profit. Intensive farming might face higher costs, so levy increases should be limited.
Senator Hartog (Volt) noted water boards arent isolated. He asked if agreements with neighboring countries Germany and Belgium are needed and if a fundamental levy revision is planned.
Senator Dessing (FVD) questioned if the polluter truly pays and if deferred solidarity might arise. FVD opposes indirect climate agenda implementation.
Senator Van Aelst (SP) noted property owners pay disproportionately more than businesses. She asked how cost differences will be addressed and if good behavior will be rewarded.
Minister Madlener stated the water board levy system needs updating. Beneficiary principle sounds simple: more use, more pay, but implementation varies. The government proposes a fairer system, ensuring low administrative burden and feasibility for water boards.
The bill strengthens the application of the beneficiary principle in water system levies through various laws, allowing water boards to better implement this principle. This may cause levy differences among residents, property owners, and nature area owners.
Climate change brings new challenges like sea level rise and varied river water supply. Water boards can use tax revenues to meet climate, energy transition, and circular economy goals. A new method will assess wastewater pollution more environmentally friendly.