Politics and Elections in the Netherlands: coalition agreement presented

[DavidB.]

As I expected, the PVV has reached a new all-time high in this week's peil.nl poll. GroenLinks has also reached a new all-time high, at the expense of D66.

PVV 42 (+1)
CDA 19 (nc)
VVD 18 (nc)
GroenLinks 16 (+1)
SP 15 (nc)
D66 15 (-1)
PvdA 9 (nc)
ChristenUnie 5 (nc)
PvdD 4 (nc)
50Plus 4 (nc)
SGP 3 (nc)
VNL 0 (-1)

The funny thing is that if Wilders does do great in the next election, it will be the right (i.e. VVD and CDA) that's going to have a real problem, not the left.

Well, let's do some maths (but let's also keep in mind that these categories don't make sense in reality when it comes to coalition formation, because the Netherlands just doesn't work like that):

2012 election:
Left (PvdA, SP, GL, PvdD): 59
Right (VVD, CDA, SGP): 57
Center/other (D66, CU, 50Plus): 19
PVV: 15

This poll:
Left (PvdA, SP, GL, PvdD): 44 (-15)
Right (VVD, CDA, SGP): 40 (-17)
Center/other (D66, CU, 50Plus): 24 (+5)
PVV: 42 (+27)

In this poll, the right is not significantly weaker than the left compared to the 2012 election.

PvdA support has evaporated: to GroenLinks and to the SP (which doesn't hurt the left in this table), and to D66 (which hurts the left). However, the SP has lost voters to the PVV (which hurts the left and shows that an increase in PVV support does not always come at the expense of the right). Meanwhile, on the right, the VVD has lost voters to the PVV (which hurts the right) and to the CDA (which doesn't hurt the right).

Note that right + PVV = 82 in this poll, whereas it was 72 in TK12. Peil.nl might be the most "enthusiastic" pollster for the right, but it is safe to say that VVD+PVV+CDA would now receive significantly more votes than in 2012.

This is why the position of VVD and CDA is still very strong. CDA will likely prevent a coalition with the PVV from being formed, but VVD and CDA still have a strong position when negotiating with the left. If the SP is to be outside the government, it will be hard to form a government that does not include both VVD and CDA (and both parties will likely insist on both being inside the government, for going in as the only right-wing party might be electoral suicide). What's more, these parties will always have the "cooperation with the PVV" card to scare other parties into compromising. (Also keep in mind that D66 will have a preference to work together with CDA and VVD to further an economically liberal (in the European sense of the word) agenda.)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Dutch politics is amazing; so many choices and all of them are terrible, even the ones that look at first as if they might not be.

[DavidB.]

Dutch politics is amazing; so many choices and all of them are terrible, even the ones that look at first as if they might not be.

You don't like the SP?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Dutch politics is amazing; so many choices and all of them are terrible, even the ones that look at first as if they might not be.

You don't like the SP?

Its basically a cult, so no. I mean I suspect I would end up voting for it right now, but...

[DavidB.]

Its basically a cult, so no. I mean I suspect I would end up voting for it right now, but...

I understand why you would dislike the party itself, as an organization, but its program doesn't seem to be so much out of line with your views.

[DC Al Fine]

I just find it crazy how not only is there an openly theocratic party with seats, there's an openly theocratic party from my branch of Christianity... With actual representation in parliament.

[DC Al Fine]

Supposing that D66 successfully implemented FPTP, who would win seats? Obviously the party system would be different, but any guesses?

[DavidB.]

Supposing that D66 successfully implemented FPTP, who would win seats? Obviously the party system would be different, but any guesses?

First of all, let me emphasize that D66 is currently not in favor of implementing FPTP; this was an idea of the past.

It is hard to imagine the Dutch party system in a UK-like FPTP system, because obviously parties would merge, et cetera. But using the 2012 election and drawing a map with 150 FPTP districts, the 2012 result would look like this:


Only PvdA and VVD would win seats in this scenario (but that might be different in elections that are less of a two-horse race).

I am in favor of implementing a non-proportional mixed-member system in which voters have two votes. 75 MPs are elected through PR (like now, but with half the number of MPs) and 75 through FPTP in single-member districts. Small parties continue to be present in parliament, but we avoid the four or five-party coalitions that are inevitable if political fragmentation continues to increase.

[DavidB.]

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree that majoritarianism is not the "Dutch way" and that pluralism in our parliament is something good. The current unpopular coalition, however, if anything, is the consequence of this inclusivism and, as such, stands firmly within the Dutch political tradition of "polderen" and of compromising. "Aggregating Dutch electorates into left vs. right", as you describe, did not lead to this coalition. In fact, this coalition was formed despite the fact that the right and the left coalesced into one party, which, of course, made the coalition awkward and unpopular from the start. As such, the formation of unpopular governments, sadly, is a direct consequence of the compromises parties have to make in order to govern, and perhaps the price we have to pay for our proportional, pluralist system.

[Angel of Death]

Supposing that D66 successfully implemented FPTP, who would win seats? Obviously the party system would be different, but any guesses?

D66 was never in favor of electing the lower house (purely) by FPTP; the original idea was to introduce (multi-member) constituencies, which I assume would have implied STV. The idea to have half of the seats be elected by FPTP was a more recent proposal. Without a constitutional amendment modifying the mandatory use of (some sort of) proportional representation (article 53), that would have implied enacting some sort of additional member system (à la Germany).

[DavidB.]

A new opinion poll by I&O Research/Twente University shows that 38% are opposed to the Association Agreement with Ukraine, 31% are in favor and 31% are undecided. If the referendum would have taken place in January, 56% would have voted against, 44% would have voted for.

Some interesting stats:

General population: 38% No, 31% Yes, 31% Undecided
High education level: 37% Yes, 32% No, 31% Undecided
Medium education level: 45% No, 25% Yes, 30% Undecided
Low education level: 49% No, 22% Yes, 29% Undecided

Without undecideds:
General population: 56% No, 44% Yes
High education level: 54% Yes, 46% No
Medium education level: 65% No, 35% Yes
Low education level: 69% No, 31% Yes

So there seems to be an extremely clear educational gap, to the surprise of absolutely nobody.

Breakdown by party (current preference, not based on 2012 vote):
PVV: 73% No, 9% Yes, 18% Undecided
CDA: 36% No, 31% Yes, 33% Undecided
VVD: 41% Yes, 36% No, 23% Undecided
GroenLinks: 55% Yes, 10% No, 35% Undecided
SP: 51% No, 21% Yes, 28% Undecided
D66: 55% Yes, 20% No, 25% Undecided
PvdA: 63% Yes, 14% No, 23% Undecided
ChristenUnie: 29% Yes, 23% No, 48% Undecided (not a typo)
PvdD: 42% No, 24% Yes, 34% Undecided
50Plus: 46% No, 21% Yes, 33% Undecided
SGP: 38% No, 13% Yes, 49% Undecided (not a typo)

The pollsters also asked respondents whether the government should act according to the referendum result if turnout is higher than the 30% threshold. 48% say the government should act on the basis of the result, 41% say the government itself should decide what to do, which I find to be a remarkably high percentage, especially given the fact that the government seems to be less popular than the association agreement. 12% say they don't know.

So what does this tell us? This poll is now being presented in the Dutch media as an "increase of support for the Association Agreement" since the previous poll. I have my doubts and think the number of polls is way too small to say anything meaningful, other than the fact that more people seem to oppose the agreement than support it, and that many people are still undecided. It is also clear that people with a lower education level and SP/PVV supporters are likely to oppose the agreement. This could benefit the "yes" camp, as this electorate is less likely to turn out than the highly educated "yes" electorate. From a democratic perspective, it is somewhat worrisome (but absolutely nothing new) that there is such a strong educational gap, which likely stems from the idea not being represented by the government. In addition to that, the EU is often seen as a vehicle that works in the interests of the "haves" and against the interests of the "have-nots". Many people see this referendum as an instrument to show The Hague that their voices should be heard, too.

[Grand Wizard Lizard of the Klan]

Question maybe stupid, maybe not:

why the hell the Netherlands make referendum on such irrelevant for them thing?

[DavidB.]

Question maybe stupid, maybe not:

why the hell the Netherlands make referendum on such irrelevant for them thing?

Because 427,000 citizens signed an official petition, which is why the government is under the obligation to organize this referendum (threshold = 300,000). People signed the petition for various reasons. Some of them were genuinely worried about the consequences of signing an association agreement with a country that is often seen as war-torn. Some think the EU is already too costly, and we shouldn't pay money to Ukraine. Some think this agreement will open the door for Ukraine to become an EU member (which doesn't make much sense, but Poroshenko stating that this should be a first step to becoming an EU member doesn't really help in public perception). Others just wanted to show they disapprove of the EU and/or the government and use this referendum as an instrument in doing so, partly because of the fact that according to the law, citizens' initiatives for a referendum can only be organized if a law has already been accepted by parliament. This is why we cannot have a "Nexit" referendum, for instance: parliament didn't sign anything on that. So this was pretty much the only possibility. It has all been played very smartly by GeenPeil, the main initiator of the referendum.

I, by the way, agree a referendum on this topic doesn't make sense.

[DavidB.]

Hurray! Another step toward gender equality. Because it's 2016.

From now on, military conscription will apply to girls as well. Defense Minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert (VVD) promised this to parliament today, after questions by PvdA and D66. In practice, conscription has been suspended 20 years ago, which means that every 17-year old Dutch boy receives a letter that the draft has been suspended and he doesn't have to show up, but that he could still be drafted in times of war. I still have mine somewhere. In the future, 17-year old girls will receive the same letter.

There has not been much debate about this, probably because no one thinks we will ever need to use conscription again. A vast majority of MPs are against reintroducing it, and VNL's idea to do so has been ridiculed by basically everybody.

Another new law: from 2020 onward, smoking on the yards of high schools will be prohibited. Makes sense, since the minimum age for buying cigarettes has been raised from 16 to 18 in 2014. Not many kids in high school are 18 or older.

[DavidB.]

New video in which Dutch citizens are threatened by the Azov Batallion (or fake?). Amsterdam Arena and Royal Theatre Carré are mentioned as places.

[DavidB.]

New peil.nl poll says 60% no, 40% yes in Ukraine referendum among people who are sure they will be voting. People who are less sure they will be voting lean more toward "no".

Meanwhile, Foreign Affairs Minister Bert Koenders (PvdA) announced that the Netherlands will stop temporarily ratifying the Association Agreement if the Netherlands votes no.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Is there a quorum? This is the sort of question a lot of normal people wouldn't bother turning out for.

[DavidB.]

Is there a quorum? This is the sort of question a lot of normal people wouldn't bother turning out for.

30%, but even then it is only a consultative referendum -- the government is not under the obligation to accept the result, which is why the 30% threshold is sort of meaningless (and highly criticized by political scientists). It was not part of the initial proposal, but the Senate wanted it... However, pollsters think turnout will definitely be higher than 30%. I think it will be somewhere between 40% and 60%.

Meanwhile, the government has still declined allocating enough money to organizing the referendum, which means there will be a lot less polling stations than usually -- which, for me, means that I will not be counting votes (and not be earning $$$), as I usually do. Instead, I will either provide you with my excellent (lol) analysis of the results or get pissed drunk with my friends while making fun of elitist establishment politicians' disappointment and shock at a large majority voting "no"

(I am still undecided, btw, but lean less toward yes than before, not because of the agreement itself -- of which I still approve -- but because of the condescending attitude of the "yes" side, which assumes voters are stupid. Typically Dutch. I have no words to describe how annoying and wrong I find that attitude.)

[DavidB.]

In the looney department, deranged Jewish Moroccan professor David Pinto had been part of VNL (and of five other parties before that) until he threw a hissy fit and left the party. Now he created his own party, LEF (which means "courage" in Dutch, derived from Yiddish, and "heart" in Hebrew, because many Dutch pronounce the v like an f; it also stands for Liberté, égalité, fraternité). I can say with certainty that this guy won't get more than 7,500 votes, and even that would be a lot.

[DavidB.]

Today, the PvdA party congress takes place. The social democrats will celebrate their 70th anniversary with their favorite pastime: backstabbing. A day before the congress, Jacques Monasch, MP since 2010, gave an interview to the Leeuwarder Courant saying Diederik Samsom should not be party leader in the next general election. The PvdA will organize an election for the party leader in October.

According to Monasch, Samsom is not the person who will get the PvdA out of its rut. Instead, a "person of stature" would be necessary, and Monasch knows exactly what he wants: Amsterdam's mayor Eberhard van der Laan or Rotterdam's mayor Ahmed Aboutaleb. The last person would be particularly suitable, because "Aboutaleb can indicate what we should tolerate and what we should not tolerate, and draw clear lines in the sand. That is what this country needs."

Monasch does not think Lodewijk Asscher, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Social Affairs and someone who is often mentioned as the PvdA's "crown prince", would make a good leader, and neither is he positive about Jeroen Dijsselbloem (Finance Minister and Eurogroup chairman) and Hans Spekman (party chairman).

Earlier this week, the PvdA suffered negative publicity because of the fact that a local chairman had tweeted that he hoped Geert Wilders would get a heart attack, but if he were to be killed by a bullet, then it should have "by the grateful Dutch people" on it. He was forced to step down, but not before a hilarious "sorrynotsorry" response in which he said he should not have send the tweets "because of the negative responses". Right.

One of my fellow congregants in my synagogue is a high-ranking PvdA member. Yesterday, a friend of mine told him that "at least there is one thing all PvdA members agree on: they all hate the PvdA". He agreed.

Happy birthday, PvdA!

[aross]

Since you mention it: To what extent is old leftist symbolism (such as singing The Internationale) still in fashion in the PvdA?

[DavidB.]

Since you mention it: To what extent is old leftist symbolism (such as singing The Internationale) still in fashion in the PvdA?

Some of the symbolism still lives on, and they sing the Internationale at party congresses, but this doesn't have actual consequences.

The party has of course been an important political force in building the Dutch welfare state and changing the Netherlands, but this was mainly done before the New Left took over within the party, who didn't like to refer to the actual people who had a role in changing the country (though they probably had no problem with the Internationale). Instead, different, more international causes than the welfare state were embraced. Afterwards, the Third Wayists also didn't like the party's past so much: according to then-party leader Wim Kok the PvdA was losing its "ideological feathers", which he saw as something positive. The current leader, Samsom, is more ideologically left-wing, but still the party's history tends to be somewhat forgotten, within the party as well.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The PvdA has basically become the sort of organisation that far left critics of social democratic parties accuse all such parties of becoming. Dutch politics is bizarre.

[DavidB.]

The PvdA has basically become the sort of organisation that far left critics of social democratic parties accuse all such parties of becoming. Dutch politics is bizarre.

I'm not in the position to judge (not a social democrat), but while I could understand why the PvdA would have been such a party during the Purple period and under Wouter Bos, I think they were pretty much back on track (not electorally, but ideologically) between 2010 and the moment they entered the current government, especially after Diederik Samsom, who is -- though no Corbyn -- fairly left-wing, became their leader.

I think at least currently it has more to do with having the wrong priorities (i.e. caring too much about being "progressive" and international while not caring about and listening to the working class, which seems endemic among most social democratic parties in Western Europe) than with truly selling out on their principles, although it was different in the past. Still, the PvdA is no Irish Labour and I just don't see how they are objectively worse than, say, the SPD or the SPÖ. Could you explain why you think they are (because I think you think they are)?

[DavidB.]

LMAO
M
A
O

Okay, I'm starting to see what Al meant. Diederik Samsom said he would campaign on the government's record if re-elected party leader in October. Good luck. I wonder if they remain in the double digits.