The universities had made scrapping the language test a condition for their offer to reduce the number of international students themselves by discontinuing or modifying certain programmes. That offer included, for example, the discontinuation of the international bachelor’s in Psychology at Erasmus University and a reduction in the number of students in the English-language tracks of Economics and Business Administration. With Bruins’ refusal, that offer is now hanging by a thread.
'Scaremongering'
During the debate, the PVV lashed out at what it called all the ‘scaremongering’ surrounding the law intended to curb the internationalisation of education. “If it were up to the PVV, we would have gone much further than we have now, but we must be satisfied with what we have.”
NSC, for its part, believes the ‘Internationalisation in Balance’ act should be even stricter. The party wants to tighten the mandatory test further. English-language programmes should provide better justification for their relevance to the labour market.
The universities, on the other hand, want the law to be less strict. They have made various proposals to guide internationalisation properly, but on the condition that the test is scrapped. Eight provinces also support this plea.
Bruins is holding off. He called the universities’ plans historic, as if they had considered the future collectively for the first time, but he did not yet want to say what their gesture means to him. In any case, he does not yet want to drop the language test.
Additional cuts
“We are not going to do this again in such a way”, said Harmen Krul, MP for opposition party CDA, on Wednesday during a debate with minister Bruins. He is annoyed by the new cuts announced in the Spring Memorandum.
In fact, the four governing parties PVV, VVD, NSC and BBB wanted to cut education and research even more deeply than they are now: by more than two billion euros. But those plans would not pass the Senate, where the cabinet does not have a majority.
In a deal with the three Christian parties and JA21, the cuts were reduced to 1.2 billion euros. But the education budget had barely been approved when new cuts emerged. The CDA, which also speaks for the ChristenUnie, compared it to ‘whack-a-mole’, the game where you hit popping-up moles back into the ground.
“For us, it also feels like a breach of trust”, said SGP parliamentary leader Chris Stoffer. He only found out about the new cuts when the Spring Memorandum was released. “That makes it even harder to swallow.”
Don’t fall for it
Other opposition parties responded with satisfaction. “Don’t fall for it again”, said Doğukan Ergin of DENK to his Christian colleagues. He would probably say the same to JA21, but that party did not take part in the debate.
D66 also saw an easy win. A few parties ‘stuck their necks out’ to make a deal and now the agreements are already in the shredder, summarised MP Anne-Marijke Podt.
Stultiens (GroenLinks–PvdA) wants to know, among other things, where this minister draws the line: what can he still defend? Even Claire Martens-America (VVD) finds it odd and understands that these parties have questions for the minister.
Sleepless night
Eppo Bruins went along with the criticism. He admitted to MPs of the OCW committee that he had ‘indeed lost a night’s sleep over it’ last week. Now he has to restore the broken trust.
“This cabinet was confronted with decisions made in the middle of the night by four parliamentary leaders”, he explained. “I was also waiting to see: would they choose new cuts to education? That didn’t happen on the side of higher education at least. That is good news.”
That is only partly true. Education will not be compensated for part of inflation, but the minister does not count that as a cut. Furthermore, higher education institutions will have to bear the cost of a problem in student finance, but he considers that a setback that he has to absorb within the education budget.
The setback involves the public transport allowance for Dutch students going abroad. On second thought, he cannot abolish it and therefore has to find the money elsewhere. He had to choose: cut from students or from institutions? “And I chose the latter.”
He especially struggles with the cut to the educational opportunity scheme – support for schools in disadvantaged areas. “That’s not part of this debate, but I still wonder how you would justify that.” Other things, such as setbacks in his own budget, he simply has to cover. That is quite normal, he believes.
No done deal
The measures in the Spring Memorandum are not a done deal. A ‘supplementary budget’ will follow and it must also pass through the House of Representatives and the Senate. The Christian parties are wondering why they should cooperate again. “One sleepless night doesn’t cut it”, sneered SGP MP Stoffer.
The coalition parties would rather focus on other topics – such as the pro-Palestinian protests that have led to damage. Bruins condemned the destruction but also defended education administrators against political outrage.
The PVV wants to cut university funding if they allow ‘despicable pro-Palestinian thugs’ to have free rein. The VVD also wants to take a tougher stance.
