When it comes to migration, we only hear Prime Minister Mark Rutte (VVD) about asylum seekers. But there are 600,000 EU migrant workers. 150,000 expatriates. And 20 million foreign tourists every year. Now Rutte even threatens to blow up his cabinet because the number of asylum seekers has recently been above average: 46,460 last year versus an average of 31,200 over the past ten years.
The prime minister is playing risky political theater with this. By fueling fear of asylum seekers, he is trying to win over voters. In doing so, he accepts that vulnerable asylum seekers are abused, people are set against each other and an atmosphere of misinformation is facilitated. And as if that weren’t cynical enough, the prime minister’s party, the VVD, obstructs precisely those things that do help to steer the influx of asylum seekers in the right direction. This is dangerous and unworthy of a decent party.
Scaremongering
Justifiably recently called on BBB leader Caroline van der Plas to stop scaremongering about asylum seekers. CBS figures show that the asylum influx last year was even 20 percent lower than the dramatic peak in 2015 due to the war in Syria. A peak that we as a society also quickly overcame. Moreover, the influx this year up to and including May is even slightly lower than last year in the same period.
Prime Minister Rutte also puts a lot of emphasis on limiting the number of following family members, while that number in the first months of this year is also considerably lower (17 percent) than the same period last year and is only slightly (3 percent) above the ten-year average . What asylum crisis are we actually talking about?
What asylum crisis are we actually talking about?
The BBB leader also called for “to look at what we can handle”. And that is exactly where the shoe pinches. This appears to be mainly due to poor fiscal policy. The General Audit Chamber concluded at the beginning of this year that the many years of cutbacks in asylum reception and the rapid reduction of reception capacities are the main causes of the current reception shortages.
In the 21 of the 23 years studied, the expenditure was found to be much higher than the costs budgeted in advance. The result: structural improvisation and a recurring need for expensive emergency accommodation, resulting in unnecessarily high costs for asylum reception and capacity structurally lagging behind demand.
In other words: by refusing to maintain sufficient standard cheap reception capacity, successive governments created a structural reception crisis.
Read also: Which coalition parties will benefit from a fall of the cabinet?
Likewise now. To cover the unnecessarily high costs, the government is cutting back 3.4 billion euros on development aid for poor countries. That is quite cynical because this budget is intended to offer perspective to people in those countries where many refugees also come from. For example, by helping to contain wars, facilitating emergency aid and promoting opportunities for a better life. However, the VVD kills two birds with one stone with this, because the party has wanted to get rid of this development aid for some time.
Illusion of crisis
In short, if we are dealing with a crisis at all, it is mainly an administrative and political crisis. One where problems are created and blown up when politically convenient. And one where the illusion of crisis is used to cut back on those things that can actually tackle the problem. That is cynical and dangerous. It only further alienates voters from politics and “is driving people crazy with this polarization”, as the BBB leader lashed out at colleagues in the House of Representatives.
By refusing to maintain sufficient standard cheap reception capacity, successive governments created a structural reception crisis
The Prime Minister would therefore do well to keep a cool head and to exchange the stage and the underbelly for the facts. Address the causes of poverty and inequality that lead people to leave home and hearth to flee to Europe. Invest in diplomacy; not to make short-sighted migration deals with dictators, but to promote progress, peace and security through which people choose to build a future in their own country. And put things in order at home, so that we have more and better childcare available for less money. That’s what a decent party would do. That is what voters expect from politicians.