The historic renewal of the new pension system received the final green light on Tuesday evening. In the Senate, a large majority voted in favor of the law of Minister Schouten (Pensions). In addition to the coalition, there is also support from opposition parties PvdA, GL and SGP.
After about 15 years of (collapsed) negotiations, countless questions from MPs and dozens of hours of debate, the way has now been cleared for the transition of some 1,500 billion euros in pension assets to the new system. The coalition, employers and trade unions already reached an agreement on this in 2019. The elaboration of this in the pension law has now been finalised.
In order to bring the pension debate to a successful conclusion, Minister Schouten had to take one last hurdle on Tuesday. During the last of many hours of debate, a lengthy constitutional debate followed in the senate on Tuesday, in which the proponents of the new pension remained silent.
Opponents
The opponents thought they were grabbing one last straw – spotted last week by SP Senator Cox – in an attempt to thwart the law for the time being. The transition to the new system would also affect the law behind the pension scheme for political office holders. According to the constitution, a two-thirds majority would be required for an amendment to this, and therefore for the adoption of the pension law.
This was not only argued by SP member Cox and other senators from parties that opposed the pension law. In addition, there were also constitutional law professors who advised the Senate on Monday not to vote on the law. In the House of Representatives, there was just short of a two-thirds majority for it, which these legal scholars believe would have been necessary.
But in the senate, opposition was limited to the declared pension opponents. Senators of the so-called ‘pension coalition’ (VVD, D66, CDA, CU, PvdA and GL, the parties that support the law) saw nothing in the resistance. According to PvdA member Crone, the professors did have a very ‘strict’ reading of the constitution. According to him, it only concerned technical changes to the political pension and a ‘simple’ majority was also enough for that.
Not impressed
D66 was also not impressed by the constitutional resistance. “It looked like a constitutional bazooka, but it’s not,” said D66 senator Backer. “It’s a water pistol.” The SGP also stated that it would be perfectly happy if Minister Schouten chose the ‘usual path’ of a simple majority.
This also cleared the last hurdle for the pension law. Earlier there was resistance in the senate because the law would barely be handled by the current Senate, on the day the new senate was elected. Incidentally, the proponents of the pension law would also be in the majority in the new senate.
Minister Schouten still had to make commitments in the Senate to keep PvdA, GL, SGP and CDA on board, among others. Those parties were concerned that the transition period to the new system would be too short. Schouten was still aiming for January 2027 as a deadline, but postponed it by a year after questions from the Senate. In addition, the door is clearly ajar for further postponement, if the pension sector still lacks time.
In addition, the left-wing parties wanted a permanent arrangement for people with heavy professions to retire earlier. Schouten referred to the unions and employers who have to come to an agreement among themselves and promised to keep a finger on the pulse. The left was satisfied with that for the time being.