🇳🇱 Politics and Elections in the Netherlands: General Election (Nov 22)

[DavidB.]

RIP in peace to 50Plus. Like every few years, the elderly had an internal fight - and it seems like it almost became a literal one this time. Today, their party congress closed without an election manifesto or party leader, and the police had to clear the room because security could no longer be guaranteed. According to their former chairman Geert Dales, this means they'll be missing the deadline to stand in the election. In 2021, they still won 106,000 votes and a little over 1% of the vote, but their only MP Liane den Haan left the party within 1.5 month after the election. Now, they'll be out completely. Bye bye!

[DavidB.]

The new PvdD board has concluded Esther Ouwehand's integrity wasn't compromised. Therefore, she's back as leader and will lead the party into the election.

https://twitter.com/estherouwehand/status/1710339084978139341?s=20

[DavidB.]

We're in the silence before the election campaign storm. Today's Peil poll shows a largely stable picture, but PVV keep gaining.

[windjammer]

What is the likely next future coalition?

[DavidB.]

What is the likely next future coalition?

It's not clear yet, but most probably some combination of 3 out of NSC, VVD, PvdA/GL and BBB. Perhaps one or two smaller parties will be needed if it's going to be a majority coalition. Programmatically I think NSC-VVD-BBB is a logical option, and having a minority coalition would stimulate the type of (political change towards more) dualism NSC and BBB want, but things will get more difficult if their number of seats gets too low - and currently BBB keep losing virtual seats. Much will depend on which party becomes the biggest. If it's GL-PvdA, Timmermans could lead the government, although they would probably need to get either BBB or VVD on board and both could be very tricky. If it's not GL-PvdA, I don't really expect them to be part of the government, and the option with VVD, BBB and NSC (perhaps with one more small party; it won't be the PVV, as NSC exclude them) looks the most likely. For now, I'd place my bets on the latter combo.

[DavidB.]

New I&O poll has VVD at 27, NSC at 26 (+1) and GL-PvdA at 26 (-3). Fieldwork was done Oct 6-9, so partly before and partly after the beginning of the war in Israel.



Most voters aren't certain of their choice yet. The below graph shows for each party certain voters (blue; first and only preference for party X), uncertain voters (light blue; first preference party X, but not only potential option) and potential voters (light green; first preference different party, but also considers party X).

If you add up certain and uncertain voters, you get the picture of the current polls - a three-way race of VVD, NSC and GL-PvdA, in which the VVD could have a slight edge. However, NSC has a much higher ceiling than the other two.



VVD voters prefer the party because they would offer stable government (47%) and because of their viewpoints (60%), mostly regarding the economy and immigration. NSC voters prefer the party because of its leader Pieter Omtzigt. GL-PvdA voters mention the party's viewpoints (79%), but also have tactical considerations (33%) more often than VVD and NSC voters.


(Standpunten = viewpoints, lijsttrekker = leading candidate, stabiel bestuur = stable government, stategisch = tactical voting).

Perhaps later more on this poll.

[DavidB.]

GL-PvdA were pivoting to the center. A smart move from their perspective, as they don't have much competition on the left (BIJ1, PvdD, SP all have big problems) and they need to increase their electoral ceiling if they want to lead the next government without having to cooperate with right-wing parties only. Both Frans Timmermans and Jesse Klaver also had a rather strong condemnation of Hamas' violence against Israelis.

But some GL activists weren't going to let this slide: in particular some of the younger activist members, including local elected representatives, wanted a more pro-Palestinian resolution to be adopted on the first joint GL-PvdA party congress yesterday. This potential threat was defused by the two party boards, who introduced a resolution most members could agree with. But the more activist members did succeed in having some other policies adopted into the election manifesto, such as the immediate (instead of gradual) introduction of a 16 euro per hour minimum wage and the abolishment of the monarchy - the latter issue is quite symbolic and probably something Timmermans would have wanted to avoid, as the monarchy's popularity is still high even if it is decreasing and it gives off "activist left" vibes.

Then, last night, controversial GL MP and candidate #17 Kauthar Bouchallikht, who was a board member of an Islamic youth organization associated with the Muslim Brotherhood before and kept a low profile in Parliament since her election in 2021, decided to "rescind her candidacy". She thinks GL-PvdA's response to the war has proven they are not pro-Palestinian enough: she wants "more attention for the Nakba". One small problem: since Friday, the candidate lists are final (I will soon make a different post on this). This means she will be on the list and GL-PvdA have to believe Bouchallikht will not take up the seat that she is almost certain to win - theoretically she could take it up and split off immediately.

In any case, the speculation about this is obviously very much something GL-PvdA would have wanted to avoid, particularly as the entire Israel/Hamas issue is a very sensitive one within the two party's bases and also risks increasing attention for the differences between GL and PvdA in general.

[DavidB.]

There will be 26 parties (or combinations thereof) running in the election, sharply down from 37 in 2021. (50Plus will be standing after all, after an online convention to draw up a new list...) For the 16 parties that won seats in 2021 and are standing again, their order is based on the number of votes in the previous GE in 2021 (for GL-PvdA this is the sum of GL and PvdA); parties that did not win seats in 2021 were assigned a random slot from 17 to 26. The candidate lists and order is as follows, with names as on the ballot:

1. VVD
2. D66
3. GROENLINKS / Partij van de Arbeid (PvdA)
4. PVV (Partij voor de Vrijheid)
5. CDA
6. SP (Socialistische Partij)
7. Forum voor Democratie
8. Partij voor de Dieren
9. ChristenUnie
10. Volt
11. JA21
12. Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij (SGP)
13. DENK
14. 50Plus
15. BBB
16. BIJ1

17. Piratenpartij - De Groenen
18. BVNL / Groep Van Haga
19. Nieuw Sociaal Contract
20. Splinter
21. LP (Libertaire Partij)
22. LEF - Voor de Nieuwe Generatie
23. Samen voor Nederland
24. Nederland met een PLAN
25. PartijvdSport
26. Politieke Partij voor Basisinkomen

Of the 16 parties already in parliament, only JA21, 50Plus and BIJ1 could be out. For the latter two I think this is likely (although 50Plus still has the potential to win 1 seat with low-info elderly voters), for JA21 it is unlikely but not impossible - I think they will still win 1 or 2 seats but 0 is not completely ruled out.

[Interesting how these sort of 'right-of-the-center-right but Reasonable™' type of parties like JA21, which theoretically find the middle ground between two electorally popular strands of right-wing politics, often don't manage to continue attracting voters - also thinking of Volya (Bulgaria), New Right (Israel) and the Finnish PS and German AfD splitoffs here. But I digress.]

Of the new parties, only Pieter Omtzigt's Nieuw Sociaal Contract will definitely make it in. BVNL have a serious shot but it will be very close. I don't think any of the others have a shot, but after BBB's success in 2021 which I didn't see coming, I don't want to completely rule anything out either.

I wrote rather lengthy descriptions of all parties that will definitely or possibly enter parliament here and onwards.

Now I'll do the others.

Splinter is a center-left, libertine, laicist party led by Femke Merel van Kooten-Arissen, who in the 2017-21 term was an MP for the PvdD before splitting off because she was not allowed to pay attention to "human issues". She is mostly popular among the 'Free Left' crowd, who could be described as very pro-secularist and very socially liberal, and economically to the left of the PvdA. This is also a crowd that now seems to overlap (but not completely coincide) with left-wingers who are critical of transgenderism, but I don't think that's Van Kooten-Arissen's thing. The party won 30,000 votes in 2021 and I was surprised to learn Van Kooten-Arissen will be trying again; she seems like a reasonable enough person to understand that after two years out of the limelight she has even less of a chance to get in. I think she'll get roughly half of her 2021 vote. Crazy fact: Splinter was subject to a Russian attempt to sow division within Dutch politics, as Putin's Night Wolves offered Van Kooten-Arissen €250,000 for her 2021 campaign. Van Kooten-Arissen rejected the offer and reported it with the relevant institutions.

The Pirate Party - running together with De Groenen ('The Greens') - will also perhaps attract some 10,000 to 20,000 votes. This time they are not run by former fetish model Ancilla van de Leest (like in 2017), but by some guy named Mark van Treuren, who looks exactly like the type of person you'd expect to run a Pirate Party. While arguably the need for a Pirate Party is only increasing, they don't seem to gain any attention anymore and I don't think they will even reach the 22k votes they got in 2021.

The LP are the proud owner of my first vote ever (in 2012), but not many more than that. In recent years they changed their name from Libertarische Partij to Libertaire Partij, indicating a swing towards a more 'progressive' type of libertarianism and messaging. They will probably get around 5,000 votes like in 2021.

Samen voor Nederland (Together for the Netherlands) was born as part of the movement against the COVID-19 restrictions and has now turned into party against the WEF etc. A quick glance on their website tells me they are essentially a copy of FVD and BVNL's views, but with more emphasis on stuff like the WEF/opposing 'Tristate City', i.e. the Netherlands becoming a city state in which we all eat ze bugz. Only the most hardcore anti-lockdown protestors will vote for this party. Samen voor Nederland will cost FVD and BVNL a few hundred votes at most (which, in a hilarious timeline, could still turn out crucial for BVNL...).

'LEF - Voor de Nieuwe Generatie' (Courage - For the New Generation) is, apparently, a party for progressive young people. They support cancelling student debt, radical climate policies, a universal basic income, free public transportation, more direct democracy, and a four day workweek. The sad thing for them: their target audience will vote for Volt.

Nederland met een PLAN ('The Netherlands with a PLAN') looks like a hotchpotch of political views which don't form a coherent ideological package at all; a little to the left on socio-economic issues, a little to the right on cultural issues, and sometimes simply confusing. They seem to care a lot about 'diversity' but oppose more immigration. Their #1 candidate has a Chinese background and apparently the PLAN has the support of a lot of Chinese organizations in the Netherlands. They won't get in.

The PartijvdSport surprisingly wants people to engage in sports. Apparently this party is run by some marketing guy - perhaps he Googled the number of people engaging in sports and figured this would be a good way to get into parliament. And with so many single issue parties, why not give it a shot? But they won't get in.

Last and perhaps (but probably not) least: the Politieke Partij voor Basisinkomen, who, as you might have figured out, support the introduction of a universal basic income. They had some limited success in Amsterdam district councils, where they won a seat in 4 districts running together with The Greens and the Pirate Party (these two are now running together for parliament, see above) as 'De Groenen Basis Piraten', which if you ignore grammar you can read as 'The Green Basic Pirates', which I thought was funny. Anyway, these votes probably came more from the Pirate component: the PPvB will also win only a couple of hundred votes at most.

That was it for this time. No JEZUS LEEFT and also no 'traditional' far-left/Communist option.

With the Volkskrant's Stemchecker you can see which parties already represented in parliament you agreed with most, based on some of the most important and/or controversial proposals over the past two years. Checkjestem.nl has a similar test which is perhaps more comprehensible to the non-Dutch public.

[Harlow]

Splinter was subject to a Russian attempt to sow division within Dutch politics

A difficult feat, to be sure

[Estrella]

Maybe it's just the translation but Stemchecker phrased their questions pretty weirdly (or maybe it's that they based them on grandstanding of other politicians: "they said this needs to be done before Christmas and the whole cabinet should resign over that issue, yes or no?") so I tried Checkjestem.

Denk 81
Volt 77
GroenLinks-PvdA 69
PvdD 69
D66 62
SP 62
BBB 58
CU 58
Bij1 54
CDA 42
SGP 42
PVV 38
JA21 38
NSC 35
FVD 31
BVNL 31
VVD 27

So as I understand it, Denk is now acting as a Turkish CDA but their platform was probably written by Sylvana Simons before she left. Other than that, Volt > GLPvdA > D66 is pretty much what I expected at the top and it's nice that PvdD has thrown the kooky voodoo weirdness overboard. I'm surprised to see NSC so low and VVD dead last behind even the far-right — but then they're basically Dutch Tories anyway.

[Vosem]

Tried Checkjestem as well.

BVNL 73
VVD 62
SGP 62
Forum for Democracy 58
JA21 50
New Social Contract 50
BBB 46
CDA 46
PVV 42
CU 38
D66 35
Volt 35
DENK 31
GroenLinks-PvdA 27
SP 27
PvdD 19
BIJ1 19

Vaguely feeling like a VVD/PVV swing voter in this election. In the last few elections I "supported" smaller parties -- the Pirates in 2017 and JA21 in 2021 -- but none of the ones this time around really catch my fancy. I think VVD is closer to my beliefs but if I were Dutch, and had been paying attention to politics since 2006-2010, most likely I would consider PVV a "natural home" of sorts. (I watched the clip of Wilders owning Baudet in the Tweede Kamer and it absolutely reminded me of all the reasons I like him). VVD have also been in government for far too long, although PVV is probably a bit of a wasted vote. Not sure which direction I'd end up going in.

[DavidB.]

Maybe it's just the translation but Stemchecker phrased their questions pretty weirdly (or maybe it's that they based them on grandstanding of other politicians: "they said this needs to be done before Christmas and the whole cabinet should resign over that issue, yes or no?") so I tried Checkjestem.

Yes, Stemchecker requires quite some detailed background knowledge on Dutch politics. I do think Checkjestem is just as good though. In general I rate these 'retrospective' vote checkers based on actual voting behavior much more than these 'prospective' ones based on election manifestos. Parties lie in their manifestos all the time but they can't lie about how they voted in the past.

So as I understand it, Denk is now acting as a Turkish CDA but their platform was probably written by Sylvana Simons before she left. Other than that, Volt > GLPvdA > D66 is pretty much what I expected at the top and it's nice that PvdD has thrown the kooky voodoo weirdness overboard. I'm surprised to see NSC so low and VVD dead last behind even the far-right — but then they're basically Dutch Tories anyway.

Maybe good to clarify this: DENK have sort of lost their populist tone for a large part and that is why I have described their shift as 'from Muslim PVV to Muslim CDA' (which itself is a little bit of an exaggeration), but it doesn't mean their policies are close to the CDA. DENK are broadly center-left on economics (but small-business friendly) and their core issue is standing up against perceived anti-Muslim discrimination. This has nothing to do with Simons, who never had any role more important than figurehead in her very short DENK career, but with this being one of the most important issues to them and their voters, if not the most important one.

As for NSC, I wonder whether their voting behavior will become different once Omtzigt has a team of 25-ish MPs around him.

My Checkjestem:

PVV 77
FVD 77
JA21 77
BBB 73
SGP 73
BVNL 69
VVD 65
CDA 65
NSC 58
SP 46
CU 42
DENK 42
D66 31
PvdD 31
Volt 31
BIJ1 27
GL-PvdA 23

Vaguely feeling like a VVD/PVV swing voter in this election. In the last few elections I "supported" smaller parties -- the Pirates in 2017 and JA21 in 2021 -- but none of the ones this time around really catch my fancy. I think VVD is closer to my beliefs but if I were Dutch, and had been paying attention to politics since 2006-2010, most likely I would consider PVV a "natural home" of sorts. (I watched the clip of Wilders owning Baudet in the Tweede Kamer and it absolutely reminded me of all the reasons I like him). VVD have also been in government for far too long, although PVV is probably a bit of a wasted vote. Not sure which direction I'd end up going in.

I could easily see you vote BVNL too. They tick a lot of boxes regarding anti-government, 'pro-freedom' ideology in the semi-libertarian sense of the word; they are vaguely conservative when it comes to traditions, but freedom is the most important to them. Wybren van Haga really hates big government in a way very few others do, particularly in the Netherlands. Objectivist Yernaz Ramautarsing is also on their list.

[Harlow]

I choose to assume this is referring to one specific, uncommonly large Wolf.





My results from Checkjestem:

Volt: 91%
PvdD: 87%
GL-PvdA: 83%
SP: 78%
D66: 74%
DENK: 70%
BIJ1: 70%
PVV: 52% (wha??)
CU: 52%
BBB: 48%
VVD: 30%
CDA: 30%
FvD: 26%
SGP: 26%
JA1: 26%
BVNL: 26%
NSC: 22%

Shocked to see NSC and not PVV or FvD, as the furthest from my views.

[DavidB.]

I choose to assume this is referring to one specific, uncommonly large Wolf.

It is not. Wolves have come to the Netherlands over the past few years and pose a difficult issue to farmers, who have to construct expensive fences. They are a protected species so you cannot put them down.

It is also one of the issues where a lot of issues in Dutch politics come together: a regional gap between people from the Randstad and people from the North/East/South, with people from the Randstad more often taking a pro-nature position out of romantic concerns while people from the 'region' view things more practically and are afraid wild wolves will be roaming around in their village or forest; people in the 'region' proposing solutions that are 'illegal' because of EU treaties that take certain potential democratic solutions of the issue off the table; and the latter issue creating the sense that 'politics' isn't interested in voices of people from the 'region'.

Of course this is all more nuanced: there are opponents of the wolf in the Randstad and supporters of it in the 'region'. But the issues surrounding wolves represent a bigger gap of thinking, based on geography but probably also on educational background - and one of underrepresentation of practically educated people from rural areas. This sentiment was one of the biggest drivers of BBB's support in the provincial election in March.

[DavidB.]

Another version of this test is the Stemmentracker, by the makers of the Stemwijzer (which will be launched later), one of the two most-used voting advice applications in the Netherlands. Beware: quite a few statements have a denying element in it ("the government should not..."), which seems inevitable as it would otherwise distort the meaning of the motion or law as voted on in parliament.

Click "meer weten" for more information on the statement. "Uitslag stemming" shows the result of the vote in parliament, with arguments from the parties.

[JimJamUK]

The LP are the proud owner of my first vote ever (in 2012), but not many more than that. In recent years they changed their name from Libertarische Partij to Libertaire Partij, indicating a swing towards a more 'progressive' type of libertarianism and messaging. They will probably get around 5,000 votes like in 2021.

Purely out of interest, can you elaborate more on the difference? My Google translate can’t tell the difference 😅

[DavidB.]

Purely out of interest, can you elaborate more on the difference? My Google translate can’t tell the difference 😅

It's very subtle and thereby kind of niche, as much so as the party. In Dutch, we have the words libertarisch (libertarian) and libertijns (libertine). I don't think 'libertair' is actually a word many people would use (different in Flanders though, I think!), but it seems as if they were going for a middle ground between the two in which it incorporates the 'libertine' element a little more and gets rid of the sharp edges of the connotation of the word "libertarisch", which sounds harsher and more ideologically rigid. This is perhaps a little similar to the discussion which was brought up sometime on whether the SP should be called Socialistische Partij or simply Sociale Partij.

[DavidB.]

Although few people decide on their vote based on foreign policy, the war in Israel is overshadowing everything else in the news right now and this could have consequences for the campaign. First of all because it sucks all the air away for other topics to set the agenda. Second of all because it is also linked to debates surrounding multiculturalism, safety, free speech and immigration - Jewish schools were closed on Friday and there were massive pro-Palestinian protests, largely attended by Muslims. To the extent this will affect parties (which could be limited), I have the following guesstimate.

This will help:

- DENK. A godsent to them. They had lost their polarizing profile and their 2 best-known MPs are no longer on the list. They risked losing 1 or maybe even 2 seats. Now, many Muslims who were perhaps inclined not to vote at all will now go to the polls with this issue on their minds - and they will vote DENK.

- VVD. I think Rutte and Yesilgöz are striking the right tone with the Dutch right-wing public. Their message is exactly the same, sometimes even verbatim. As PM, Rutte can act statesmanlike in an international crisis as he has done so often; as Justice & Security Minister, Yesilgöz can act tough when it comes to "setting limits" on free speech and protecting the Jewish community. Foreign policy spokesman Brekelmans was visible on Ukraine and will be visible on Israel.

- PVV. Many voters don't like the sight of Dutch squares full of Muslim protesters. The PVV have always had a clear position on immigration, multiculturalism, Islam, Israel, and the Jewish community's safety. Much more so than a party like BBB, with which the PVV compete for a lot of right-wing voters.

- FVD. This party has undergone a big ideological shift over the past 2-3 years. Baudet used to say he supports Israel "unconditionally" and wore IDF t-shirts to the gym. No longer so: after COVID-19, the party has become much less conventionally right-wing nationalist and more of a catch-all anti-establishment/"anti-globalist" vehicle, attracting many conspiracy theorists. Where do all conspiracy theories ultimately lead to? That's right. No wonder that the Jewish State isn't as popular with FVD as it was. They cannot go all the way pro-Palestinian, because their base is very split (largely along generational lines: older = more pro-Israel), but they want Israel to show "restraint" in responding to Hamas just as they want Ukraine to show "restraint" in responding to Russia's brutal invasion. And here's the thing: this position is a lot more popular when it comes to Israel. Support for Ukraine is probably about 80%, but Israel/Palestinians is a 50/50 issue in society. Thereby, Russia's war against Ukraine fading away out of the picture helps FVD. Its position for appeasement against terror, packaged as "pro-peace" and "pro-restraint", is simply supported by many more people when it comes to Israel. Baudet's "both sides" video was watched more than 200,000 times now - in the same debate he also complimented DENK on their views on Israel - and may attract new voters. Some of their youth members dream of a reactionary "conservative alliance" with Muslims against the modern world. According to an opinion pollster, 10% of the Muslim public considered voting for FVD in the PS election earlier this year. It cannot be ruled out that they have some limited success in this.

This will hurt:

- NSC and BBB. Their voters come for other issues: good, uncorrupted government and decent standards of living (NSC) and the future of agriculture and center/periphery issues in general (BBB). The war in Israel pushing these issues out of the picture hurts them. Even if NSC and BBB would take an electorally 'popular' position on the issue and even if NSC has the highly qualified former Dutch ambassador to Israel as its foreign policy spokesman, these parties don't have issue ownership here.

- Tempted to say GL-PvdA. I already discussed this above. Their base is split between moderates (more in PvdA) and radicals (more in GL), although there are also moderates on the issue in GL and radicals in the PvdA. From the start of the war, De Telegraaf has been writing two articles per day about this with the message that GL-PvdA cooperation is doomed. First I thought "nice try, but not going to happen" but then it actually did, leading to prospective MP Kauthar Bouchallikht "leaving" the combination. She is still on the list and she will be elected, probably with a truckload of preferential votes from pro-Palestinian activists - she is likely to reach the preferential threshold, just like she did last time. Attention for this isn't going to fade away. Timmermans will be stuck between a rock and a hard place - he doesn't want to be Corbyned with the general public but also has to appease or at least silence the activist base from causing this internal dispute to overshadow their campaign. Perhaps this becomes easier for him if Israel's response gets bloody, as he will then condemn Israel as usual and most of his voters will be happy.

However, there is also an opportunity for Timmermans in this, because vis-a-vis Jetten/Dassen/Ouwehand/Marijnissen he has the right international experience to sound "statesmanlike" on this to the center-left public.

- All of the other unmentioned parties, because it will suck away attention for whatever they want to pay attention to.

[Harlow]

Timmermans will be stuck between a rock and a hard place - he doesn't want to be Corbyned with the general public but also has to appease or at least silence the activist base from causing this internal dispute to overshadow their campaign. Perhaps this becomes easier for him if Israel's response gets bloody, as he will then condemn Israel as usual and most of his voters will be happy.

It unquestionably already has.

[DavidB.]

New Ipsos/1Vandaag poll shows NSC and VVD gaining and increasing their gap with GL-PvdA. Numbers compared to September 26.

This would mean a massive loss for the center-left parties. D66, GL, PvdA, SP, PvdD, Volt and BIJ1 won 60 seats in 2021. Now, they would be at 44 seats, less than 30% of the vote - and this includes D66 and Volt.

https://twitter.com/Opiniepanel/status/1714239437100495062?s=20

[DavidB.]

An issue not many people are talking about, but which will be decisive for a lot of younger voters in the coming decade if policy isn't changed, is student debt.

The Rutte-II government (VVD-PvdA, 2012-2017) abolished student grants and introduced the student loan system - PvdA Minister of Education Jet Bussemaker was responsible. This was also supported by D66 and GroenLinks. Since the introduction of the system in 2015, the total amount of student debt has doubled.

The "social" student loan system was based on two premises: your student loans wouldn't matter for any potential mortgage and the interest rate would remain approximately 0. The first one turned out to be a lie immediately. Many students and graduates with student debts were shocked to learn that on October 9th, when all eyes were on the war in Israel which had just broken out, the Ministry of Education instutition responsible for student affairs announced that the interest rate on student debt would go from 0.46% to 2.56%. This will cost graduates hundreds or even more than a thousand euros per year.

I suppose there's still a chance this doesn't happen, but it could happen. In that case, expect student debt to become a decisive issue for a lot more people in the coming years. 330,000 students and graduates have a student debt amounting to more than 30,000 euros; before the introduction of the loan system, only 115,000 people had such a debt. But even people with lower debts will easily pay hundreds of euros per year in addition.

Student grants have been re-introduced as per this year, but the amounts of money are the same as in 2015 when it was abolished, not corrected for the considerable inflation.

[somerandomth]

An issue not many people are talking about, but which will be decisive for a lot of younger voters in the coming decade if policy isn't changed, is student debt.

Interesting, if this issue being centre stage were to benefit one party in particular, which party (or parties) would it be? Are there any parties that are renowned for being very pro-student?

[DavidB.]

The election will now take place in less than a month and this evening, the first election debate on tv took place. There are two major changes in the entire debating season. First of all, there will be fewer participants in the debates. Participation is decided by the polls. This means most debates will be centered around NSC (Omtzigt), VVD (Yesilgöz), GL-PvdA (Timmermans), and PVV (Wilders), and in some cases also Van der Plas (BBB). This is a major setback for the parties that are lower in the polls, most importantly the parties which are used to being big but are set to lose many seats: D66, CDA and the SP. The second trend is that participants are supposed to have more time to actually talk about issues in depth without just having 60 seconds to produce a few one-liners; debates with green and red buttons to indicate agreement or disagreement with simple statements have been abolished entirely. The most important driver behind this trend is Pieter Omtzigt, who refused to attend debates with too many people and overly simplified statements.

That's the theory. In reality, the first debate did have some aspects of the things that went wrong in the past. In College Tour, Dutch students could ask Pieter Omtzigt, Dilan Yesilgöz, Caroline van der Plas and Frans Timmermans questions about all sorts of subjects. Timmermans and particularly Omtzigt got much more time to talk without being interrupted by Twan Huys than Van der Plas and especially Yesilgöz. Omtzigt received a few loaded questions about his lack of a party manifesto (which he said will be launched on Tuesday) and on whether he is willing to become Prime Minister, which he refused to answer yet. Frans Timmermans said he had always been against EU Commission President Von der Leyen's immigration deal with Tunisia, which he called a "solo action" - a remark that sparked fierce criticism by both Yesilgöz, who says you cannot be part of something and afterwards claim to disagree and who wants to renegotiate deals if things go wrong, and Omtzigt. Timmermans also got flak for excluding nuclear energy, an issue on which the overwhelming part of the otherwise left-wing oriented room seemed to disagree with him. He said there are no studies that prove it is feasible; Yesilgöz immediately remarked she would send him the studies "this evening still, so he can read up on it". Omtzigt and Van der Plas also agreed with Yesilgöz on this matter.

It is heartening to know that Frans Timmermans is an avid reader of this thread on Atlas - he promised to address the exact two issues regarding student loans that I pointed out in my above post, i.e. he wants to roll back the proposed increase of interest rates on student debt and he wants to ban the factoring in of student debt in receiving a mortgage.

On the "who with who" question, Omtzigt refused to pick sides - he said he could imagine to deal with "security of existence" (bestaanszekerheid), this election season's buzzword, more easily with GL-PvdA and BBB but with immigration more easily with the VVD. Van der Plas said "I want to do it with Pieter", Yesilgöz dodged the question saying it is first up to voters, and Timmermans didn't respond but praised Omtzigt and reiterated that it would be good if the VVD were to be in opposition. Earlier in the debate, he said he could imagine coming to an agreement with BBB on nitrogens, which Van der Plas rebuked by saying something along the lines of "I don't think so". The BBB leader also said she could imagine working with the VVD if they "became less left-wing". By now it seems clear she is picking the right-wing lane to the VVD more explicitly than before.

In the end, I think the debate helped Omtzigt and Timmermans the most.

The remainder of the debate season (with party leaders only) looks as follows:

- Friday 3 November: Leaders of 6 largest parties on Radio 1 (probably: NSC, VVD, GL-PvdA, PVV, BBB, and either PvdD or D66)
- Sunday 5 November: VVD, GL-PvdA, NSC, and potentially PVV (depending on their polls) on RTL (television)
- Sunday 12 November: Apparently another RTL debate, this time with all of the above but also with BBB, PvdD and potentially D66 (depending on polls)
- Thursday 16 November: SBS6 television debate with biggest 4 parties in polls on November 1st, probably VVD, NSC, GL-PvdA and PVV
- Friday 17 November: EenVandaag on television with leaders of CDA, ChristenUnie and SP
- Monday 20 November: EenVandaag on television with leaders of VVD, GL-PvdA, NSC, PVV, BBB and D66
- Tuesday 21 November: NOS on television with leaders of almost all parties in two shifts: early "kiddie table" debate with leaders of small parties, late bigger debate with leaders of big parties only

Not sure how many I'll watch. In addition to this, Nieuwsuur will have separate shows with every party leader in which they are interviewed like Andrew Neil does it in the UK - you could also say they will be "grilled". I probably will be watching most of those as in 2021 I found them to be more worthwhile and insightful than these shallow one-liner-ish debates, of which I also think this evening's debate was an example.

An issue not many people are talking about, but which will be decisive for a lot of younger voters in the coming decade if policy isn't changed, is student debt.

Interesting, if this issue being centre stage were to benefit one party in particular, which party (or parties) would it be? Are there any parties that are renowned for being very pro-student?

D66 and GroenLinks have the name of being "student parties" (particularly the former) but were very much involved in creating the problem, as was - obviously - the PvdA. Volt is popular among students and has clean hands here. At the same time, students/graduates may be more interested in a solution than in blaming someone. In that case, the party most credible in promising to undo (some of) the damage may end up being popular. Timmermans' pitch this evening proved that GL-PvdA could definitely be this party.

[Harlow]

Why was Wilders not included in tonight's debate?

[DavidB.]

Why was Wilders not included in tonight's debate?

According to PVV #2 Fleur Agema, he was not invited. The PVV surpassed BBB in the polls at the moment NSC entered the race, so if polls had been decisive (but College Tour didn't claim this), Wilders should have been there instead of Van der Plas.

He has been excluded for debates like these in the past too, even though his polling numbers would have sufficed for an invitation. The fact that this was College Tour and university students are one of the PVV's worst demographics may play a role here, though I doubt BBB do any better.