Dutch voters choose for two parties on the opposite sides of the political spectrum
The New Church in The Hague looked different on election night. Its solemn atmosphere was completely overturned by green lights, loud music and balloons of the D66, a secular party, which was celebrating the election result in this unorthodox location. The result was just as surprising as the church’s makeover. Far from the expected fragmented political landscape, the voters clearly divided their preferences between the liberal party (VVD) and the Labour party (PvdA), which won respectively 41 and 38 of the 150 seats, earning more than 25% of the votes each. None of the other parties won more than 15 seats.
“People have voted strategically,” said Jaap De Hoop Scheffer, former Secretary General of NATO, and former leader of the Dutch Christian Democratic party (CDA). “The liberals did not want the socialist to be the biggest party, and the other way round.” The two winning parties won votes from people who would normally vote for the more extremist parties, the far right PVV, and the SP.
De Hoop Scheffer rejected the claim that the moderates won the elections: “We cannot classify this result as a victory for the middle, because these parties are very far apart ideologically.”
Just two years after the last elections, the Dutch went to the polls on Wednesday 12 September to choose the members of the lower house of Parliament. The previous government, led by the liberal party leader Mark Rutte, fell last April when Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party (PVV) withdrew his support to the government coalition. Wilders refused to accept austerity measures to cut the country’s deficit in line with EU rules. In the months before the elections, the polls showed a tight race between VVD and the far-left Socialist Party, (SP).
Opinion polls were important in creating the dichotomous outcome. “The polls were a driving force behind the campaign. Voters based their choice mainly on what was indicated by the polls, resulting in a one-on-one battle between the Liberal and the Labour party,” explained Caspar van der Berg, assistant professor of Public Administration at Campus The Hague of Leiden University. He agreed with De Hoop Scheffer: “It is not accurate to say that people voted for a moderate government. People wanted either a center-left or a center-right Prime Minister but now, ironically, since social-democrats and liberals are the biggest, they will have to work together. This happens with a proportional electoral system.”
“Media attention in the electoral campaign is crucial, and it can help explaining this unexpected result,” said Arco Timmermans, research director at the Montesquieu Instituut. “The parties at the extremes of the political spectrum lost because of the media attention given to the champions, Mark Rutte (VVD) and Diederik Samson (PvdA), who were facing each other at the final stage of the election campaign.” He too does not believe in a victory of the moderates: “VVD and PvdA have won, but they are not middle parties. Both have moved further to their respective extremes, and they can’t be qualified as parties in the middle. ”
The truly moderate parties either lost votes or gained a few seats. The Christian Democrat party, which used to dominate Dutch politics, repeated the bad result of 2010, in which its seats were halved. Two years later, it lost 8 of its 21 seats. “The CDA did not have an election manifesto which distinguished it sufficiently from other parties,” said De Hoop Scheffer. “The party is unable to find an alternative for the Christian traditions and roots in which it is embedded.” De Hoop Scheffer shows pessimism for the party’s future: “CDA has been losing elections for quite some time and I’m afraid we might not have seen the end of it.
Another traditionally center party, D66, won 12 seats, only two more than in the 2010 elections. The party chair, Ingrid van Engelshoven, was satisfied with the outcome: “We had tough competition, but we won two extra seats. We are a real alternative in the center.” During the campaign, D66 held a strong pro-EU stance. “It was a risky strategy and we probably lost votes for it, but we needed to give a clear vision of the Netherlands in a more democratic EU,” said Bob Bot, the party campaign manager.
Despite the foreign press describing the overall result as “Pro-EU”, the Dutch view it more as “not a victory of anti-European parties,” as Timmermans puts it. “The two most outspoken EU supporters were D66 and the green party (Groenlinks), which lost many seats. We cannot conclude that pro-European parties won.” His research fellow at the Montesquieu Instituut, Lucie Spanihelova, agrees: “The EU issue was clearly on the table, but the party that pushed the EU angle the most, the PVV, lost because it overstretched itself.” People voted over concrete issues such as health care, the labour and housing market, and pensions.
Wilders played too much on a theme like Europe that, in the end, “hasn’t made such a big impact on the way people voted,” said van der Berg. “It’s a bit too soon to say that Wilders has been defeated, but his momentum has disappeared. Wilders has tried to dominate the discussion over economic issues, but without much success. There is also a sense of disillusionment with him after he showed to be an unreliable partner in the government coalition. Still, with 15 seats, the PVV remains the third biggest party. There is still a basis for its supporters in society, particularly between those who feel victimised by the forces of globalisation and of the economy.”
Now that the voters have spoken, negotiations to form a government coalition are underway between VVD and PvdA, which together hold the majority of the seats. It is unlikely that a third party will join them, since it is not needed, even if the two parties do not have a majority in the Senate: “The Senate is a relatively depoliticised body that looks at the quality and feasibility of legislation, but is not ideologically or party-political driven,” said van der Berg. “Since the crisis is severe, and the electorate has given a clear sign, there is a huge responsibility for the two parties to make it work,” added van der Berg.
“It will be a tough negotiation, because on many issues the parties are ideologically far apart,” said De Hoop Scheffer. “The rising cost of health care, the relations with Europe, reform of labour and housing market are four big dossiers the government has to tackle: not an easy task. If PvdA and VVD agree, we will see a government with a lot of infighting, and I am not sure how long it could survive.”
In order to successfully rule together, trust is important. “The two parties need to trust each other in dealing with issues that will intrude the government’s agenda following coalition agreements,” said Timmermans. This is why a short and flexible coalition agreement is preferable to a very fixed and detailed one. “The more you go into detail, the more vulnerable your deal will become.”
The negotiations may still last a few months, but Timmermans expects a coalition to be formed by Christmas: “It’s a matter of credibility.”
Photo courtesy of Roel Wijnants/FlickR
Just Words 