|
|
|
|
|
by Zeebrommer
1326 days ago
|
|
> This is honestly just dumb Yes, but in an indirect way. At some point, nitrogen deposition was identified as harmful to nature, and emissions targets were put in place. Politicians then did everything they could not to be the one having to introduce unpopular legislation, until they couldn't anymore. Now the government has painted themselves in a corner and cannot give permits for building projects anymore without breaking the law. I think we'll see this more often in the future when the consequences of ambitious targets will need to be reckoned with. |
|
If you can fit your compliance push into something that seems minor and distant for most voters, it's probably less politically toxic than going for the direct problem that might be controversial.
"We need to scrap gas guzzlers" is a direct attack on your voters, but "We might not be able to issue construction permits in 2025" is distant and doesn't necessarily affect anyone you know personally.
It probably comes from the same mindset that says "let's pay for a lot of (programme) with a high surtax on hotel rooms because that pretty much only impacts external tourists who aren't going to vote us out over it."