iGO News – General – SGP response to brochure distributed by Natural Ouddorp

Ouddorp – During the election period, all kinds of calls to vote are launched. By the political parties themselves, of course, but also by all sorts of other organizations and individuals. GSP: “There’s nothing wrong with that, of course. At least: if it’s done honestly, if no inaccuracies are said. That’s what a recent leaflet about development on the coast, which was also placed as an advertisement in an island newspaper.” Read more: SGP opposes further development of the Ouddorp coast >>

To follow

The leaflet says it all: the SGP would be in favor of the construction of apartments and luxury hotels on the coast. And at the same time an opponent of the preservation of nature, agricultural land, the openness of the landscape, the culture and identity of Ouddorp and Sunday rest. Is this really the case? No, that’s not fair at all.

The SGP’s electoral platform is clear: there really is no more room in Ouddorp for a large-scale expansion of leisure. Building on the dunes, the beach and the immediate surroundings is certainly not an issue for the SGP. The SGP also wants limits to be placed on the number of pitches for bed and breakfasts. And the SGP wants to question the “framework for the development of residential leisure”, because it sometimes seems that this policy leaves too much room for leisure in certain respects.

The SGP is committed to preserving the characteristic qualities of our island: coastline, tranquillity, space and nature. Sunday rest is important to us. It is a great blessing from God that he gave man a weekly day of rest. Everyone benefits. Maintaining this day of collective rest is therefore a very important point for the SGP. We are not deceived by those who say that each individual must determine for himself whether he has a day of rest and which day it is.

I hope you will agree with these views. But you might be wondering, “What about Ouddorp Bad Oost?” We are very honest on this: it is a difficult file for the SGP. It’s not a completely new plan, so we can’t take a completely open stance on it. In 2019, the city council unanimously approved the construction of housing and a hotel at this location. The SGP then saw no possibility of voting against the plan. Since 2007, policy documents have repeatedly stipulated that buildings can be erected on this location. It would be bad management to suddenly take over the job after so many years that construction is finally not allowed. In 2019, the SGP succeeded in ensuring that the number of dwellings in this location was limited and a so-called “open room” remained unbuilt. After the judge canceled the plan due to nitrogen uncertainty, the developer submitted new applications for this location. There are different thoughts on this subject within the SGP group. On the one hand, once again: after so many years, can we suddenly vote against building here? Is there (also legally) room for this? And on the other hand: can we justify to local residents that three years later we are still making an exception for this “residential leisure development framework” project? Can’t we and shouldn’t we now toe the line that at the head of the island there is no more room for new holiday homes? These are complicated questions. And there are many interests at stake. This is why the SGP does not wish to take a definitive position until the municipal proposal on these candidacies is submitted to the municipal council. At election time, it may be interesting to come up with simple sentences, but the SGP does not want to be such a party. We need to conduct a thorough and responsible assessment.