OCW budget wins enough support

Minister Letschert had to weather a storm of criticism, but ultimately her budget has enough support. There is a majority to drop the cap on student loan interest.

These are tense times in Dutch politics. Right-wing parties are making almost impossible demands, but should the minority government then seek support from the left? The VVD would rather not. If the government falls, the education budget will once again be up in the air.

But that felt far away of this during the debate on the OCW budget. None of the parties demanded concessions on other issues, such as nitrogen or wealth tax, in exchange for supporting the budget.

Interest

The interest on student loans dominated the debate. The minister and her party, D66, faced a barrage of accusations: they had broken a promise to students by scrapping the plan for an interest cap.

D66 stayed out of the skirmishes, but did submit a motion on the issue. A majority of parties support it: the coalition of D66, CDA and VVD has won over JA21 and the Christian Union.

The motion proposes a different use for the 40 million euros that had been earmarked for the interest cap. D66 MP Ilana Rooderkerk wants to use 10 million euros for an additional increase in the basic grant and 30 million euros to refund tuition fees to vocational education students who leave their course halfway through the academic year.

No apologies

She faced sarcastic questions from Pro, SP, BBB, Volt, Denk and the Party for the Animals, all of which tried to unsettle D66, but Rooderkerk did not flinch. She refused to apologise for breaking a promise, and the CDA later did the same. The VVD was not asked to do so.

Pro, SP, BBB, Denk and Volt also submitted a motion. They want the government to honour its promise to students and introduce an interest cap of 2.5 per cent after all. But they do not have a majority.

As a result, a plan worth 40 million euros dominated the House of Representatives debate on a budget of around 58 billion euros. The minister advised against several amendments, including proposals for PhD grants for teachers and additional training places in dentistry, but some of those amendments were not even discussed during the debate.