{"id":123917,"date":"2021-03-04T17:31:11","date_gmt":"2021-03-04T16:31:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/?p=123917"},"modified":"2025-12-19T11:25:26","modified_gmt":"2025-12-19T10:25:26","slug":"young-parliamentary-candidates-see-eye-to-eye-on-a-remarkably-wide-range-of-subjects","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2021\/03\/04\/young-parliamentary-candidates-see-eye-to-eye-on-a-remarkably-wide-range-of-subjects\/","title":{"rendered":"Young parliamentary candidates see eye to eye on a remarkably wide range of subjects"},"content":{"rendered":"

The elections for the House of Parliament are coming up, on 17 March. For many students this will be the first time they\u2019re allowed to cast their vote. That is why on Wednesday evening, Cedo Nulli organised a debate between young representatives of the Netherlands\u2019 leading national parties. This year\u2019s campaign trail is almost entirely online, and the present debate is no exception: over 150 students had to log in on Zoom to listen what the candidates had to say. Still, the evening\u2019s debate actually raised more questions than it answered.<\/p>\n

\"\"

\n\t\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/span>\n\tImage by:<\/span>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tChris Aalberts<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>

The participating candidates are all in their twenties. They represent the ten largest parties nationwide \u2013 apart from PVV, which decided against sending someone. They\u2019re a motley crew. Only one of the nine panel members is in an eligible place on his party\u2019s list of candidates: Daan de Kort, no. 28 on the VVD roll. Other candidates will only become an MP if their party manages to outperform the polls: Harmen Krul (CDA, no. 21), Freek Jansen (FvD, no. 7), Eva Akerboom (PvdD, no. 7) and Kavish Bisseswar (PvdA, no. 14). The candidates representing ChristenUnie, D66, GroenLinks and SP have no prospects of landing a seat.<\/p>\n

Political experience<\/h2>
\"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button>

Daan de Kort (number 28 for the VVD) will probably be elected. <\/span><\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>

Each of the candidates is given several minutes to introduce him- or herself. An enthusiastic Harmen Krul (CDA) remarks that he only got 15 seconds at a previous debate that same afternoon. It becomes clear from the candidates\u2019 preambles that most of them are already politically active. Their experience ranges from local party group chair or political staffer in the House of Representatives to LSVb board member. This political savvy, combined with the lack of public interaction inherent to an online debate, makes it hard to get down to brass tacks. Since the candidates are unable to gauge their audience\u2019s existing political knowledge or play the room, they tend to stick to platitudes and generalisations.<\/p>\n

After introductions, the candidates are invited to discuss four different themes. Each of these discussions leaves you feeling less than satisfied \u2013 albeit for different reasons.<\/p>\n

Student loans<\/h2>

Four candidates start by discussing the student loan system introduced a few years ago. The representatives of PvdD, FvD and PvdA tell us that they would like to scrap this arrangement. PvdA and PvdD stress that they would like to compensate students for the years that they had to make do without a base grant. Daan de Kort (VVD) is the only one in favour of keeping the scheme. No one questions whether the other parties\u2019 promises are actually realistic: by the looks of it, De Kort\u2019s position will be vindicated, since the Netherlands\u2019 budget deficit is taking on stupendous forms in the wake of the Covid pandemic. Right now, radical changes to the student finance system \u2013 let alone room for extra compensation \u2013 don\u2019t seem on the cards. Nor does anyone point out that it\u2019s particularly easy for FvD and PvdD to make expensive promises, since they won\u2019t be participating in any formation negotiations.<\/p>\n

\"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button>

Eva Akerboom (PvdD)<\/span><\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>

The second discussion focuses on the climate. Freek Jansen (FvD) has no time for a dedicated climate policy. Still, this is good news for the evening\u2019s debate, since it highlights a number of different political positions. PvdA and PvdD want to invest further in climate change mitigation, for example, and have all sorts of ideas and proposals on offer. VVD isn\u2019t too wild about these suggestions \u2013 although the party does want to take some measures in response: build a new nuclear power plant, for example. Usually, when it comes to climate policy, VVD can be found on the more sceptical end of the spectrum. But with Forum also contributing to today\u2019s debate, the liberal conservatives seem a beacon of nuanced \u2013 indeed centrist \u2013 thought on these issues. Still, this is due to the composition of the panel more than anything.<\/p>\n

More 'gezellige' student houses<\/h2>

The other candidates get to discuss the EU. All of a sudden, talk veers towards a \u2018Nexit\u2019. Rather surprising, since apart from PVV and Forum, none of the parties present is in favour of a Dutch withdrawal. This means that this proposal has no chance of being included on the agenda in the years ahead. While the EU does come in for considerable criticism, almost none of the candidates have European experience. As a result, the debate quickly shifts toward ideas like elected European Commissioners and the introduction of more qualified majorities. These proposals require treaty amendments that won\u2019t be initiated any time soon \u2013 meaning that over the next few years, they won\u2019t be appearing on the House agenda either.<\/p>\n

The evening concludes with the housing market. Everyone\u2019s in favour of more homes \u2013 after all, it would be foolish to say otherwise. The candidates all have their own spin on the matter though: CDA wants more gezellige<\/em> student houses, D66 seems enthusiastic about converting vacant office buildings and SP wants to do something about speculators and rack-rent. It\u2019s safe to assume that none of the participating parties objects to these kinds of proposals: meaning there\u2019s not much meat to this debate. So the discussion eventually drifts toward a blame game, with the opposition parties taking the coalition members to task. While SP is justifiably critical of CDA\u2019s track record in this area, it all feels a bit facile, since the socialists have never taken part in government.<\/p>\n

Hobbyhorses<\/h2>
\"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button>

Harmen Krul (number 21, CDA)<\/span><\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>

If there\u2019s one thing this debate does make clear, it\u2019s how complicated everything has become for voters in this age of political fragmentation. Nowadays, we have a glut of medium-sized parties, and the organisers didn\u2019t want to leave anyone out. There are too many candidates on the dais, each of whom can only participate in half of the discussions. And they keep referring to political hobbyhorses of a questionable significance. Time and again, you wonder whether the candidates\u2019 ideas are truly distinctive \u2013 or are actually comparable, by and large, with those bandied about by their colleagues. Who have their own hobbyhorses to ride, or limit themselves to pointing out their rivals\u2019 failure to realise a commonly-held ambition at some point in the past. And whether a proposal is actually feasible is hardly ever debated.<\/p>\n

In this confounding mishmash of opinions, aspects of personality and image almost certainly carry more weight than substantive points. And judging the responses, the debate also has a clear winner: Harmen Krul (CDA), who manages to stay friendly throughout and is one of the few participants who seems able to divert from the script every now and then. But is this enough for students to vote CDA? As it stands, Krul is too far down the list to be considered eligible.<\/p>\n\t

\n\t\t

Chris Aalberts is a Political Communication lecturer and researcher and works as a journalist. He strives to report on political developments from an unbiased and non-partisan perspective. Aalberts recently published a book about Forum voor Democratie (FvD), De partij dat ben ik. De politieke beweging van Thierry Baudet<\/a><\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\t<\/div>\n\n\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

De redactie<\/h2>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t