Quest for new political balance in the Netherlands - Aspenia.it

For many Italians, the Netherlands is considered a paragon of political stability. The country is known for pragmatic governance, a strong economy, and a political culture in which compromises seem more important than ideological struggle. Yet, precisely that reputation has come under severe pressure in recent years.

The House of Representatives elections of October 2025 and the subsequent formation of the cabinet led by Prime Minister Rob Jetten of the left-liberal party D66 show that the Netherlands, such as other European countries, is struggling with a fragmented political landscape and with the question of how to govern effectively in a time of polarization.

The political landscape

The Netherlands has a system of proportional representation. Unlike in countries with a district system, such as the UK, or a majority bonus, such as Italy, virtually every vote counts towards the distribution of the 150 seats in the Dutch House of Representatives – Tweede Kamer. Consequently, no single party can ever govern alone. Coalition governments are no exception, but rule.

After elections, long weeks or months of negotiations often begin between various parties to form a cabinet, which can count on a parliamentary majority. The system has made the Netherlands relatively stable for years. The necessity of creating compromises prevented major political shocks and fostered a culture of consultation and consensus.

However, over the last two decades the Dutch party landscape has changed significantly. Large mainstream parties lost ground, while new parties emerged around themes such as migration, climate, agriculture, non-western immigrants, animal rights, European integration, and administrative reform. The result is a parliament consisting solely of medium-sized and small parties, making it increasingly difficult to form stable coalitions.

The 2025 Elections

During the elections of October 2025, no single party achieved a convincing victory, making various potential coalitions politically difficult or even impossible. After lengthy negotiations, a minority cabinet emerged of the left-liberal D66, the right-liberal VVD, and the Christian Democratic CDA, led by Rob Jetten. Together they make up 66 seats in the 150 Tweede Kamer. In the Senate, they also have no majority.

The concept of a ‘minority cabinet’, in particular, deserves a brief look. Unlike most Dutch governments, this cabinet does not possess sufficient seats in parliament to pass legislation independently. For virtually every legislative proposal, it must seek support from opposition parties, left or right. This makes governing fundamentally different from a classic coalition, where a fixed majority can govern stably and calls almost all the shots.

A smell of fear

The Netherlands has so called ‘traditional governing parties’ and new, often non-establishment parties. After October, D66, a long-standing party, which narrowly won the elections, was allowed to lead the formation talks. Their decision was made to form a cabinet with only other traditional parties. Instead of also inviting new, non-establishment parties to at least participate in the negotiations, a centre-right minority government was quickly preferred, in November.

Weren’t there enough traditional parties available, then? Certainly there where. The three coalition parties could have teamed up with the combination formula of social democrats and greens (Pro), which would have provided them a comfortable majority in the House of Representatives and the Senate. This option was blown away by the right-liberal VVD. It’s leader, Dilan Yesilgöz, had promised her voters never, ever to cooperate with Pro.

Yesilgöz’ promised made sure she experienced a surge during the last weeks of the campaign. With 22 seats, the right-wing liberals remained large enough for government participation – which is always a strong desire of the of former Prime Minister Mark Rutte.

At the same time, the progressive liberal D66 doesn’t want to cooperate with right-wing non-establishment parties such as the farmers' party BBB and the right-nationalist party JA21. With those two as well, there would have been a majority in both Houses. Such an occasion would be risky for D66, which fears its voters will defect to Pro at the next parliamentary elections. So, partly because both liberal parties in the coalition have fear for their voters, a minority variant was chosen as ‘the best outcome’.

Old fashioned governing

On paper, such a minority government need not be a problem. Scandinavian countries, which have regularly successful minority cabinets, are a good example. In the Nordic countries or elsewhere, in practice it depends on the way such a cabinet cooperates with parliament. And this is precisely there that the Dutch government seems to be running into its biggest problems.

The central question is not why the Jetten-cabinet is struggling to find majorities, which has been the case since it’s inauguration by King Willem-Alexander. Consequently, the start of this cabinet has been predictable. It is more interesting to examine why the search for majorities is proceeding so laboriously and being so very difficult.

According to some, the reason why doesn’t lie in the fragmentation of parliament but more so in the coalition's governing style. Although the cabinet is formally a minority government, it often operates as if it were a regular majority coalition. The three governing parties first negotiate a compromise amongst them and so on present it to the rest of parliament with the assumption they will find support for it.

Paradox

This creates a paradox: it leaves little room for opposition parties to exert substantial influence on the substance of policy. Politically speaking, this is also very unattractive. Why would an opposition party take responsibility for policy to which it has barely been able to contribute or, at the very least, have had a meaningful say? And therefore, this can be called the most important, structural weakness of the Jetten cabinet.

Setbacks

How does this translate into political practice?

Under pressure from the right-liberal VVD, the Jetten cabinet has initiated a policy of austerity and savings. To meet the NATO target of 5 per cent, among other things, major cuts are planned in the healthcare sector and on social security. Also, changes to the pension system are foreseen. Let alone the many small cutbacks the government want’s to make in order to find the money for defence spending.

For instance, cuts were to be made to care for the disabled, the duration of unemployment benefits was to be shortened, and the retirement age was to be raised. These were all matters that Pro and the trade unions, in particular, opposed. To date, there have been no major cuts or reforms by parliament, because no majority could be found.

Important: the drive to cut spending is almost automatic in the Netherlands. This is due to tight budgetary rules the country has imposed on itself since the 1990s. All expenditures are fixed for every entire government term, and any windfall in the state treasury must go towards paying off the national debt.

Consequently, there is virtually never room to spend extra money. Also, borrowing on the markets at favourable interest rates is a big taboo. Such holy rules create a culture of low spending, but also a lack of vision and a general acceptation to take certain risks, such as neglecting the maintenance of bridges, roads, canals, and railways. 80 billion euros will be needed for overdue infrastructure maintenance alone. This money hasn’t been budgeted, because, according to the rules, it’s just no there.

Frugal or not, frustration soon arose among right-wing opposition parties, particularly regarding Minister for Development Cooperation Sjoerd Sjoerdsma (D66). His budget had been approved with the support of small right-wing radical, Christian, and conservative parties. The catch? Deleting millions in money support for UNWRA, a UN organization for the Palestinians.

Without consulting the these rightist parties, Sjoerdsma decided to allocate funds for UNRWA anyway, which caused fume out of their ears. They withdrew support immediately, forcing Sjoerdsma to beg for new support from leftist party Pro, which demanded an additional 320 million euros for development aid in 2027 alone. This now concerns the entire budget for this government term. So after next year, Mister Sjoerdsma's will be out of money until the term of this government ends in 2030.

Structural flaw

The fundamental flaw is not that a minority cabinet now governs the Netherlands. The mistake is that the cabinet is attempting to apply the political logic of a majority government to a minority structure. A true minority government doesn’t start with a virtually finalized coalition compromise, but builds policy from the ground, and is always in consultation with multiple parliamentary partners.

It would have been an alternative to enter into negotiations during the formation phase with parties, which could provide structural rather than ad hoc support. In such a case, stable parliamentary support would have been established, naturally in exchange for demands and wishes of the constructive opposition parties. In Denmark and Sweden, we have seen many such government structures over the past decades. Over there it worked, but over here it hasn’t yet materialized.

Political culture

For a Dutch minority government to function effectively, there must be a different political culture. A single fixed coalition should not be central to this; instead, there must be a continuous process of cooperation with various parties. In such a context, compromises are not concluded only after the government has reached an agreement, but rather during the parliamentary process.

Furthermore, a major agreement with one or more opposition parties is still lacking. The Jetten cabinet seems only partially willing to make a shift into this direction. It’s has still been re-negotiating every vote, which has concrete consequences: virtually every major political dossier requires a new search for a majority.

Sometimes the cabinet seeks cooperation with progressive parties, sometimes with small Christian parties or right-wing factions. Every law requires a different combination of support. It makes decision-making slow and unpredictable.

What are the consequences? For citizens, the image emerges of a national government, which is constantly negotiating, without communicating properly which direction it ultimately wishes to take. For businesses, this style of governing means uncertainty regarding investments and regulations. And for foreign partners and the EU, it raises major questions about the administrative effectiveness and reliability of the Netherlands.

Fragmentation, not the only explanation

It is tempting to attribute all Dutch political problems and challenges to the large number of political parties in parliament. Yet it doesn’t explain everything. After all, there are other European countries with fragmented parliaments who manage to organize long-term cooperation in a good matter. The difference lies in the political strategy.

A minority cabinet can function stably when sustainable agreements are made in advance with a few permanent parliamentary partners, even if they are not formally part of the government. The Netherlands has only followed this path to a limited extent. As a result, every next negotiation starts really from scratch.

Laboratory

The Dutch situation is not unique. In Germany, Belgium, Spain, Italy, and the UK, too, the political landscape has become much more pluralistic in recent years. Traditional mainstream parties are losing ground, while new movements are breaking through the traditional left-right divide. This makes coalition formation more complicated and increases the need for political flexibility.

The Netherlands is therefore no exception and is increasingly regarded more of a laboratory for the question of how democracies could function when no single political movement or bloc is dominant. The Jetten cabinet demonstrates the greatest challenge of modern parliamentary democracies is not necessarily a lack of majorities.

Playing catch-up

The real challenge lies in organizing sustainable cooperation in a political landscape where power is distributed among many parties. For the time being, the Dutch government appears to be governing based on classical coalition logic, while the political reality is different. Mister Jetten and his cabinet are playing catch-up. As long as the coalition first makes internal compromises and only then seeks support in parliament, every major decision will once again depend on complex negotiations.

Leap into the dark

The biggest stress test is yet to come, as the national budget for 2027 must be ready before the beginning of September. The cabinet had already begun it’s negotiations with the opposition optimistically before summer recess, but talks with the left-wing Pro party and the small right-wing parties utterly failed.

In order to make things right, Jetten and the minister of Finance have resolved to negotiate with these parties again, for two weeks in August. If that round also fails, they will present their own budget in parliament. It will be a leap in the dark, because no one in the Netherlands knows who will support it.

Without real, structural support, the minority cabinet will fall, and mister Jetten can take a single ride to the palace and offer the King to submit his resignation. With a deal, the cabinet will presumably govern on until the next Senate elections, which will be planned in March. It is to be expected they will be a ‘referendum’ on the functioning and the results of this government. In any way, it’s not looking very good.

This article was published on AspeniaOnline.it

Rob Jetten (beeld: YouTube, RVD)