Politics and Elections in the Netherlands: coalition agreement presented

[jeron]

Thank you for your lengthy explanation; this makes a lot of sense. If I remember right though, VVD is not really the "classical" party of the centre-right in the sense that CDU, ÖVP or Tories are; that role would be the CDA? How did they gain their prominent role of leading centre-right party in the first place, only to seemingly lose it already at the moment, to the PVV?

First off, PVV is by no means centre-right.
VVD is usually to the right of CDA. Support for christian parties has been eroding since the 1960s. The VVD benefited from this trend. VVD consists of two main groups: classical liberals and conservatives. Generally speaking the party establishment is more liberal than the party itself and the party is more liberal than its voters. Conservative VVD voters now have an alternative which is called PVV.

[jeron]

VVD consists of two main groups: classical liberals and conservatives. Generally speaking the party establishment is more liberal than the party itself and the party is more liberal than its voters. Conservative VVD voters now have an alternative which is called PVV.

Not really, and it all depends on your conceptualization of liberal. In general I'd say there are not many people who could qualify as "classical liberals" in the VVD: this is the Netherlands, the most right-wing people within the VVD still advocate >30% taxation and government intervention in all sorts of stuff.

There is, however, a difference between the more "conservative" (but by no means socially conservative) VVD members and more "progressive" VVD members. The former group focuses on issues like law and order, defense, an Atlantic foreign policy (currently often combined with soft euroskepticism), and lower taxes, whereas the more "progressive" members are the ones who pushed for liberalization of social issues, European integration, et cetera. However, this is much more a scale than a dichotomy: it is not about "two camps within one party". Recently, since Rutte-I, there hasn't been much debate within the party -- in general the VVD is an "applause machine", but in the past, there was more internal debate than now. However, it seems like the more "progressive" VVD members have been more silent. Some former VVD politicians are unhappy with what they perceive as the rightward shift of the VVD, and some of them have become members of D66 instead. It should be noted, however, that the party top is somewhat to the left of the party members and of most of the party's voters. In general, there is not much opposition within the party to the rightward shift. However, shifting to the right might render it harder to form coalitions without backtracking on too many promises and staying credible, which has, of course, gone wrong in 2012.

There are two camps within the party. It might be less clear now, but is was very clear when Rutte and Verdonk were battling for the party leadership. Verdonk represented the more populist and conservative wing and Rutte the liberal wing. Many people who supported Verdonk now vote for Wilders.

[jeron]

Ritual slaughter? So like all halal/kosher slaughter, or merely those deemed particularly cruel?

There is a difference between the voting constituencies of PvdD and GroenLinks. GroenLinks attracts inner-city creatives, students, and some "young urban professionals". The PvdD has two core constituencies. One consists of largely the same people that GL attracts, minus the students. Add to this first PvdD constituency rich people in rich suburbs (sometimes somewhat older), mainly women, who could otherwise vote for D66 or for the VVD (yes, electoral competition between the PvdD and the VVD is a thing; some rich people love the environment, are "progressive", but don't like to be taxed). This constituency consists of generally highly educated people in the Randstad metro area who are concerned about the environment and animal rights. A second constituency, however, seems to be very different: the PvdD continues to attract a sizeable amount of working-class protest voters in peripherical areas, for instance in Limburg. Many people lost their trust in politicians. Voting for a party that supports animal rights and poses an alternative to "the system" seems both harmless and a signal to "The Hague".


PvdD leader Marianne Thieme in an anti-TTIP dress at the annual ceremony in which the budget is presented.

There is hardly anyone from VVD who votes PvdD. De Hond had a poll last year and there were more VVD voters who considered voting Socialist Party than PvdD. PvdD like Groenlinks performs best in the largest cities. People who 'don't want to be taxed' wouldn't vote PvdD as its economic policies are left-wing. In general, PvdD performed best among GL (and to a lesser extent) SP voters

[jeron]

There is hardly anyone from VVD who votes PvdD. De Hond had a poll last year and there were more VVD voters who considered voting Socialist Party than PvdD. PvdD like Groenlinks performs best in the largest cities. People who 'don't want to be taxed' wouldn't vote PvdD as its economic policies are left-wing. In general, PvdD performed best among GL (and to a lesser extent) SP voters

Sorry, but you're just saying things that are not true. I advise you to read Josse de Voogd's "Bakfietsen en Rolluiken: De Electorale Geografie van Nederland".

PvdD does well in the big cities but also in quite some municipalities outside of the big cities: 1) rich suburbs: e.g. 't Gooi, the Haarlem region and 2) peripherical areas, e.g. the entire regions of Zuid-Limburg, Oost-Groningen. PvdD performs very well in a number of suburbs that are characterized by a strong VVD/D66 vote and a relatively weak GL vote, e.g. in Heemstede.

Regarding electoral competition between VVD and PvdD: the EenVandaag/De Stemming poll has often showed that VVD and PvdD alone are "battling" for one seat, which is quite much, considering that the PvdD only has two seats. I am not denying the fact that most of the PvdD supporters are, indeed, former GL/SP/PvdA/D66 voters -- I'm just stating that competition between PvdD and VVD (in rich suburbs) is a thing. In the peripherical regions, there is also competition between PVV and PvdD among protest voters. My point regarding taxation was not that the PvdD would support low taxation, it was that there is a certain group of people (which is by no means large, but it is a phenomenon that is worthy of discussion in the context of the PvdD) who generally don't like taxes so much and believe in the economic policies of the VVD yet are concerned with the environment and are donors to animal rights organizations etc. In the end, these people might vote for the PvdD, even if they don't like the PvdD's economic plans.

Some of the things you say are not true either. You claim that PvdD is doing well in Limburg. During the last parliamentary elections PvdD got 1.8 % of the vote compared to a national average of 1.92%. There is no proof for your claim that PvdD takes many votes from VVD, none whatsoever. The largest party in Heemstede in 2012 was PvdA! PvdD's share of the vote in Heemstede was 2.32% (up about 1% from 2010). Meanwhile GL's share of the vote went down from 7.4% in 2010 to 4.0% in 2012. So, it's easy to see where those PvdD votes came from.

[jeron]

Media personality and the country's most well-known lawyer, Bram Moszkowicz, is no longer the leader of the PVV splitoff party VNL (Voor Nederland/For the Netherlands). Moszkowicz had no political experience and didn't seem to be particularly interested in a) voicing the party's opinions rather than his own and b) learning things about issues not related to themes regarding justice, law and order. In my opinion, he was always a liability, even if there might be some people who would vote for him just because they like him. It might do the party no good in the short term, but it will be better in the long term (but I'm a party member, so some wishful thinking is involved here).

It will be very difficult for VNL to get a seat. That's why they asked Moszkowicz to be their leader. He's well known an people would vote for him because of that. Several people tried to position themselves to the right of the VVD and they were more widely known and more popular than the current VNL party leaders. Despite that Rita Verdonk only received about 50,000 votes in 2010 and Hero Brinkman got less than 10,000 votes in 2014. If VNL continues like this, it'll get quashed between VVD and PVV and end up with zero seats.

[jeron]

This thread is excellent...I hope you keep it up! It's great to learn more about the intricacies of Dutch politics.

If I can ask a question: where do the voters of D66 (as opposed to party members/elites) belong on the political spectrum? It seems that D66 fills a lot of the role that Green parties do in, say, Germany or Austria, while being quite a bit further to the right on economic issues.

Thank you very much On the left-right scale, I'd say most D66 voters are very centrist (some of them center-right), but definitely to the right of PvdA and GroenLinks voters, and while they would prefer the PvdA to the VVD on issues regarding Europe, multiculturalism, and law and order, they would generally prefer the VVD to the PvdA when it comes to the economy. These are people who believe in the "Third Way", to whom socialism seems outdated yet who find economic liberalism (in the European sense of the word) too shallow. The party itself is more economically right-wing than its electorate, but that does not cause many problems for the party, simply because it generally does not affect D66 voters directly, because they tend to be highly educated and relatively affluent. In terms of geographic distribution, some political scientists speak of a "progressive belt" which goes from Alkmaar via Amsterdam (and its suburbs) and Utrecht (and its suburbs) to the Arnhem-Nijmegen region. Add to that the obvious university towns (Leiden, Delft). Recently, they have overperformed by much in many big and medium-sized cities outside the Randstad metro area as well. The places where D66 does well generally correspond with those where GroenLinks does well, with the important exception that D66 has much more support in the suburbs (affluent, higher educated voters) whereas GroenLinks relies even more on voters in the big cities. GroenLinks also does better with low-income voters than D66.

People tend to think of D66 as a somewhat elitist party. While people's impression of a GroenLinks voter is some "edgy" hipster in Amsterdam, with not such a high income, people's impression of a D66 voter is a judge or maybe an academic with a much higher income, who either lives in a good neighborhood in a big city or in a well-off suburb (or they think of a student). As always, stereotypes need to be taken with a grain of salt, but in this case, there is also some truth in it.

I'd say D66 as a whole is centre-right. Politically, D66 used to be closer to PvdA than it is now. Especially where social security is concerned, D66 has moved considerably in the direction of VVD. D66 usually takes a rather pragmatic stance, which leads to some people saying that they don't have any real opinions at all. D66 electorate used to be mainly concentrated in the densely populated Randstad area and it is still regarded as a Randstadish party. D66 has tried to broaden its electorate and it seems to have succeeded during the 2014 municipal elections and defeated PvdA in many cities where PvdA used to be the largest party, like Enschede, Groningen, Tilburg and Arnhem.

[jeron]

I hope you and the people close to you are okay, JosepBroz. Aren't you in Brussels?

Security & Justice Minister Ard van der Steur (VVD) is in dire straits. Ibrahim el Bakraoui, one of the perpetrators of the Brussels attacks, had been deported from Turkey to the Netherlands in July 2015 because Turkey knew there was a terrorist threat. The Dutch got an intelligence notification with "very urgent" on it, but did not open it and let El Bakraoui go. Van der Steur blames Turkey, but that is not considered very convincing. What makes it worse, German terror suspect Samir E., to whom Brussels terrorist attacks perpetrator Khaled el Bakraoui sent his last text message, also landed in the Netherlands in July 2015 without any problems -- on the very same flight as Ibrahim. 

In short, to put it bluntly, people get the impression that the Netherlands has become the gateway for terrorists to the EU because the Security & Justice Ministry, which has been a merger of several ministries since 2010, is incompetent. This has to do with the fact that there is a toxic culture in the ministry, which is too large and basically unmanageable for ministers.

It is likely that Van der Steur will have to step down. This has the potential to become a scandal that can make the government collapse, especially given Van der Steur's extremely bad explanation in parliament, so it would be better for the government if he steps down by himself.

The question is will the VVD be prepared to let him go now. It would be the second minister within this ministry to step down and VVD may want to avoid that. It does show the failure that the ministry has been. After the next elections the police will go back to the interior ministry.

[jeron]

How did CU get in the adult debate but SGP and PvdD did not?

More seats in parliament, more seats in the polls. I also think 50Plus would get into the adult debate before either of SGP and PvdD because of the polls. Thank G-d that didn't happen.

I am no fan of 50plus either but for the last couple of months 50plus has been consistently higher in the polls than CU. so, according to the polls 50plus should have been in the adult debate.

[jeron]

The formation process is going to be a disaster if VVD-CDA-D66-50Plus-CU-SGP don't have a majority and they need a left-wing party. But if they do, it is the most likely potential coalition.

If they do need a left-wing party, I'd see Asscher entering he coalition (if he still leads the party by then) before Klaver. But this is all speculation and probably all wrong. Last time around we all thought a three or four-party coalition would be necessary.

Well, now 50plus has ruled out governing with parties that don't want to lower the retirement age back to 65. So, effectively 50plus has ruled out being in government. They could still support a government on single issues of course. I agree that PvdA is more likely to  join a VVD-D66-CDA coalition since GL has taken a turn to the left under Klaver.

[jeron]

Yeah, I was partly joking, and that sounds plausible. I've also seen the name of Ank Bijleveld (CDA) float around. I'd like Balkenende (but as you said, probably fake news) or Plasterk but not someone like Bijleveld, who would owe her position solely to being a loyal party foot soldier. That type of appointments for functions as important as this one just irks me.

I don't see why Bijleveld would want to leave her current position in Overijssel. She'll stay there for six more years. Besides, CDA is in no position in the largest cities to claim anything. Mayors are formally still appointed by the king but in practice the city council elects the mayor. That makes it very unlikely that a loyal party foot soldier becomes mayor. Why would the other parties on the city council accept someone solely because he or she is a loyal party member of another party?

[jeron]

Something else: NRC Handelsblad, the Dutch Guardian, today reported extensively about the way DENK uses fake profiles/socks on Facebook and Twitter to silence online critics.

NRC is hardly the Dutch Guardian. The Guardian is a newspaper which has always been linked to the Labour party. The Dutch Guardian therefore would be De Volkskrant. NRC is much closer to The Independent.

[jeron]

Apart from that De Volkskrant was connected to the Catholic pillar, not the social democratic one...

But back on topic: DENK imply the WhatsApp stuff was leaked by Sylvana Simons and her strategist Ian van der Kooye, which is probably true.
[/quote

De Volkskrant has not been part of the Catholic pillar since the 1960s when it changed to a social democratic stance, like the Guardian in the UK. The Guardian supported Labour during the last UK general election. NRC has always been much more a liberal newspaper, which is stated in its statute.  NRC had a survey carried out a few years ago and it showed that especially D66 and to a lesser extent Groenlinks voters were overrepresented among its readers.

[jeron]

And another poll which has PVV losing a lot  compared to the previous poll (I&o research)

PVV 20 (-6)
VVD 24 (-1)
D66 20 (+5)
GL 19 (+1)
CDA 16 (+2)
PvdA 14 (+2)
SP 11 (-2)
CU 8 (+1)
50 plus 7 (-2)

Another poll showed people are switching from PVV to other parties for three reasons:
1. Trump. Some are worried about Trump's policies and Wilders seems to support Trump
2. Wilders can't get anything done because no one wants to be in a coalition with him
3. People agree with things he says but he seems to offer no solutions.

[jeron]

I dont see any reason why Rutte has to be replaced if the VVD is going to be the biggest non-PVV party. Rutte strenght is that he is flexible and can built several coalitions if needed, which will be needed for the next formation. Rutte is still popular despite some scandals, the only one that has the same favorable ratings is Pechtold (D66). Removing Rutte will push the VVD more to the right with Zijlstra.

Offering Foreign Affairs to Rutte would be a solution. He wouldn't necessarily have to resign as party leader. I think Rogier's scenario will only be relevant if GL is needed and I don't think it's impossible. But yes, I agree it is far more likely that Rutte will stay on, even if GL is needed.

Why the hell would GL prefer Zijlstra or Schippers instead of Rutte?

No, you misunderstand. Rogier's point is that Buma or Pechtold, who would be more acceptable to GL, would become PM in that case. Rutte could even remain on as VVD leader. Schippers and Zijlstra don't come into the picture.

Ok, in that way. Still very improbable as, I think Rutte leadership skills are needed, which everyone appreciates of him. I dont think the PM position has ever been negotiated since the 70s. And I dont think the VVD will accept that it will be negotiated if they become the largest non-PVV.

Exactly. And in the 60s and 70s the PM position was negotiated between the largest Christian parties, that already cooperated and eventually merged into CDA. Buma would probably be a Balkenende like disaster so I can't imagine anyone would want that. Both D66 and GL would prefer Rutte over Buma.

[jeron]

Watch this:


This has the potential to be BIG.

Of course a Rutte-Buma two-horse race with D66-VVD swing voters ending up voting for Rutte and PVV-CDA swing voters ending up voting for Buma would be nuts since CDA and VVD will both be in the next government, but these voters on the right may not mind. In fact, they probably want both to be in the coalition.

That said, caution is needed here. Many PVV voters may prefer Buma to Rutte yet will still not be willing to vote for him.

And check that D66 number for Rutte.

That's hardly a surprise since D66 and VVD are both liberal parties

[jeron]

I think Rogier is spot on when it comes to the causes of the increase of PP (is that really the abbreviation we're going to use, EenVandaag?) support if that is actually what is happening. Switching from PvdD to the Pirates is not too large a step.

 a vote for them is a wasted vote anyway. They won't get in.

True. EenVandaag doesn't have a real poll anyway so one seat in their survey doesn't really mean that much.

[jeron]

New poll by TNS NIPO/Kantar. VVD now the largest party.

VVD 26 (-1)
PVV 24 (-4)
D66 21 (+2)
CDA 17(-)
SP 15(+2)
GL 14 (+1)
PvdA 12 (-)
50plus 6 (-1)
CU 6(-)
PvdD 3 (-1)
SGP 3 (-)
Denk 2 (-)
FvD 1 (+1)

[jeron]

If CDA ends up first, they should make a coalition with VVD, PVV, 50+ and SGP (it has the majority of seats). I suppose that some "deceived" PVV and 50+ would vote for them for the next election, consolidating their place as first party.

That's not going to happen and if CDA does decide to do it, the next election would be a total disaster for CDA, like the 2012 election.

[jeron]

If CDA ends up first, they should make a coalition with VVD, PVV, 50+ and SGP (it has the majority of seats). I suppose that some "deceived" PVV and 50+ would vote for them for the next election, consolidating their place as first party.

That's not going to happen and if CDA does decide to do it, the next election would be a total disaster for CDA, like the 2012 election.

It was a total disaster for the CDA because they were the minor coalition partner, it would have been totally different if they were the leading coalition party.

It was a disaster because many CDA members and voters did not want CDA to cooperate with PVV. So when they did, the party was divided. The party would be even more divided right now because of what happened in 2012 and because CDA vowed not to cooperate with PVV again. I'm sure voters would not be forgiving.

[jeron]

The debate between Rutte and Wilders was great. I think Wilders had the upper hand but am obviously extremely biased.

Obviously. I haven't seen the debate myself, but everyone I talked to thought Rutte had the upper hand.

[jeron]

Turnout in Groningen well over 60%. Utrecht around 60%. Enschede supposedly about 9% higher than 2012

[jeron]

More than 30.600 have voted in Rotterdam in the last hour.

I expect another 100.000 over the next 3 hours, bringing the total to around 345.000 votes.

That would be 76% turnout (+13.5%)

MoE = +/- 2% (if voting trends continue)

Turnout at 18.00 in Rotterdam was 55.3%, which means it is on par with the 2006 election when final turnout was 70.9.

[jeron]

Groningen over 65% now and Amsterdam on 55% at 17.45

[jeron]

Meanwhile, Almere only at 44% at 17.00. PVV is the largest party there in the city council.

[jeron]

More than 30.600 have voted in Rotterdam in the last hour.

I expect another 100.000 over the next 3 hours, bringing the total to around 345.000 votes.

That would be 76% turnout (+13.5%)

MoE = +/- 2% (if voting trends continue)

We'll wait and see. 76% seems a bit high.

Turnout at 18.00 in Rotterdam was 55.3%, which means it is on par with the 2006 election when final turnout was 70.9.

It will be much higher than that.

74-78%.

With 76% most likely right now.

71% is only likely if there's a significant dropoff in voting over the next 3 hours ...