Incoming Prime Minister Rob Jetten (D66) had kept his speech short for Tuesday’s debate in the House of Representatives about his coalition agreement. He could “just imagine” that there would be “enough questions” for him from the opposition. He had seen that correctly, Jetten had to defend the agreement he made with the VVD and the CDA for two hours on Tuesday. What D66 did not expect is that most of the criticism of the agreement would focus on the coalition plan to accelerate the increase in the state pension age from 2033.
From Geert Wilders (PVV) to Jesse Klaver (GroenLinks-PvdA): almost the entire opposition made it clear that they absolutely did not support that plan. It is the ‘horseshoe model’ in practice: the left and the radical right do not agree on much, but precisely in the field of social security, both wings in the House see nothing in the right-wing policy of the upcoming coalition of D66, VVD and CDA.
Opposition parties are against the measure, among other things, because it hits practically educated people the hardest. They start working younger and often do more physically demanding work than theoretically trained people.
But on Tuesday the criticism went further than the content: opposition parties found Jetten unreliable. Jesse Klaver believes that the coalition is careless with the “hard-fought pension agreement” that he had also negotiated at the time as a GroenLinks-PvdA MP. That agreement, a thorough renovation of the pension system, was concluded in 2019. This was preceded by nine years of difficult negotiations between politicians, trade unions and employers.
Also read
‘The starting point for negotiations’: opposition reacts critically but sees room in Jetten minority cabinet
‘Knife in your back’
The upcoming coalition wants to adjust these agreements. The state pension age will now increase by eight months if the life expectancy of the average Dutch person increases by one year. The coalition wants to turn those eight months into a year. This means a faster increase in the state pension age, while it was agreed in the pension agreement that it would not increase further.
According to SP leader Jimmy Dijk, it shows that the “first lesson of Jetten I is that you should not conclude partial agreements.” Then as an opposition party you get “a knife in your back”.
In any case, Dijk intends to thwart the cabinet. Klaver said that he has looked critically but constructively at Jetten’s plans in the past period. On Tuesday he tended to be critical: “Why on earth would we make agreements with you, if you can say at any time: nah, never mind, those agreements did not really exist.”
During the debate, Jetten started to call the increase in the state pension age a ‘proposal’ that still needs to be ‘developed’ further.
Jetten listens to the House, he often said on Tuesday. Because his minority coalition only has 66 seats, he will need the opposition for majorities. So a good relationship with the House is essential, he knows.
But he did not immediately agree not to increase the state pension age. That would be a loss of face for Jetten and his coalition in the first major parliamentary debate on the plans, and would make the opposition very powerful.
A decision on the AOW is up to the new cabinet, Jetten said formally. “That new cabinet will have to relate to statements from the House of Representatives, and then decide: what do I do with it?” During the debate it was noticeable that Jetten changed his language about raising the state pension age. He started calling it a “proposal” that still needs to be “developed” further.
Also read
In search of billions for safety and education, the coalition is cutting healthcare and social security
Criticism of austerity agenda
GroenLinks-PvdA prepared a motion on Tuesday to stop the increase in the state pension. The coalition immediately complained that the party does not include coverage, while it costs 2.5 billion euros not to increase the retirement age.
During the debate it became clear that the motion could not count on a majority – in addition to D66, VVD and CDA, the SGP (three seats) and the breakaway PVV members of the Markuszower Group (seven seats) voted against, which provided the necessary 76 votes against. It is expected that JA21 will also vote against the motion late on Tuesday evening because the party also opted for a higher state pension age in the calculation of the election manifesto.
The debate was a warning for the incoming cabinet: large parts of the opposition are not satisfied with the plans
Jetten escaped unscathed, but Tuesday’s debate was a warning for his upcoming cabinet: large parts of the opposition are not satisfied with his plans, the left and the far right agree in their criticism of the austerity agenda. In addition, opposition parties can link the increase in the state pension age to other themes.
The coalition has recently called on the opposition repeatedly to handle files individually. Otherwise, the country would become ungovernable for the incoming minority cabinet. During the debate on Tuesday it became clear that the question is whether the opposition wants to facilitate Jetten I in this way. The opposition parties tried to find room for negotiation on all kinds of issues, from softening the significant healthcare cuts (left, 50Plus) to tightening the migration policy (JA21) or a more ambitious climate and nitrogen policy (GroenLinks-PvdA).
Others drew clear lines. SGP leader Chris Stoffer indicated that “Mr. Jetten has really lost the SGP” as soon as there is any broadening in the field of medical-ethical policy.
Also read
Chamber in debate on coalition agreement – what is the opposition’s position?
The journalistic principles of NRC
