Wilders testifies to fragile trust between the forming parties

The coalition parties that want to get a grip on everything are not yet able to get a grip on each other. Geert Wilders’ reaction to the choice of the VVD senators to help the dispersal law gain a majority shows that the four parties are still wondering what benefit they have from each other.

Wilders did not beat around the bush on Wednesday in front of the gathered journalists: “We have a big problem and it must be solved in the coming days.” This broke the radio silence of the first weeks of formation and Wilders linked the dispersal law directly to the formation.

In one sentence, Wilders torpedoed the explanation that the VVD and party leader Dilan Yesilgöz were trying to convey. According to Yesilgöz, it was not up to her to dictate to the Senate faction how to vote. That is clear from a constitutional point of view, but that is not what Wilders wants to hear. The PVV leader wants a VVD partner on whom he can rely. The fact that the senators of that party went directly against Yesilgöz did not inspire him with much confidence.

Self-willed

It is a sign that mutual doubt between the four negotiating parties remains high, despite all press reports about successful talks.

The irony is that the dispersal law could well help a possible cabinet of PVV, VVD, NSC and BBB. The expectation is that this law will lead to less dissatisfaction among the municipalities that now arrange the lion’s share of reception, and to lower costs and less unrest as a result of hastily set up asylum seeker centers, as is now regularly the case.

But something else also counts for Wilders. Unlike in 2010, when he tolerated a cabinet of VVD and CDA, the PVV is now the largest party and full cabinet participation beckons. Slip-ups and controversial choices will be held much more heavily against him than they were then.

He needs the VVD, as the supplier of 24 seats and the only one of the four parties with serious management experience. But the VVD has not yet recovered from the blow of the election results – the party lost ten seats. It is not without reason that Yesilgöz is now hinting at a toleration role for her party.

The VVD is also full of headstrong senators who will not allow themselves to be tamed by the party leadership, and mayors who have repeatedly stated the need for the dispersal law for their municipality. Pragmatism: that is also a product of management experience.

Willingness to make concessions

In turn, the other parties wonder how many concessions Wilders has really made and is willing to make. The PVV leader started the year by withdrawing three controversial old bills, but these were laws that had been on the shelf for years. The other parties note that Wilders has also not withdrawn many proposals.

According to someone involved in the formation process, there is also irritation among the formation partners about Wilders’ tweeting behavior. The PVV leader, who vowed to have softened during the election campaign, occasionally still has the same tendency as Donald Trump in the US: posting sharp or angry messages on social media.

This is how he set himself to X last weekend, in English, again against the “traditional media” which, according to him, are “dominated by left-liberal woke-driven ‘intellectuals’ who live in a fake fantasy world.” In the past he has called journalists “scum from the ledge.”

On Monday he wrote a short, disapproving review of the Van Zwol committee’s report on the demographic prospects in the Netherlands: “The asylum and migration inflow must really be limited much more severely.” Wilders fulminated on X.

Also read
State Commission on Demography: limiting migration necessary to maintain prosperity

Unwise and not helpful to the negotiation process, according to the discussion partners at the formation table: substantive differences of opinion should first be discussed among themselves.

Cabinets are never formed because they fulfill the dreams of all forming parties down to every detail. Cabinets are viable if they feel better to the participating parties than the alternatives: a trip to the opposition benches or new elections.

Are they ready? Only at BBB, the smallest of the four, there is little doubt. To take the leap for the rest requires a high degree of mutual trust, the trust that the other person will not push you or drop you. And that trust is fragile these days.

To share





Email the editor