{"id":182671,"date":"2025-10-17T14:11:59","date_gmt":"2025-10-17T12:11:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/?p=182671"},"modified":"2025-12-19T11:27:56","modified_gmt":"2025-12-19T10:27:56","slug":"studenten-vullen-kerkbanken-voor-verkiezingsdebat-met-mirjam-bikker","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2025\/10\/17\/studenten-vullen-kerkbanken-voor-verkiezingsdebat-met-mirjam-bikker\/","title":{"rendered":"Students fill pews for election debate with Mirjam Bikker"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

More than two hundred students filled the pews of the Hoflaankerk on Wednesday evening for an election debate organised by Ichthus of the student association C.S.F.R. In a hall full of young voters, Mirjam Bikker \u2013 lead candidate of the ChristenUnie \u2013 was the undisputed main guest.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\"\"

Lead candidate Mirjam Bikker of the ChristenUnie made an evening available for a student debate.<\/span><\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure>

\n

The evening began according to Ichthus\u2019s familiar traditions: with the association song, a prayer, a scripture reading and Psalm 40. After that, election candidates from six parties took to the stage: CDA, ChristenUnie, SGP, VVD, GroenLinks-PvdA and D66. The loudest applause was for Bikker, who visibly felt at ease in the Kralingen church.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Selfie and autograph<\/h2>
\"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button>

At the start, those present sang the association song.<\/span><\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure>

\n

For her it is also a form of coming home. During her student years Bikker was active within C.S.F.R., where she served a year on the board of the Utrecht dispuut Sola Scriptura. She began her remarks in a style familiar to those present, with the words \u2018amicae amicique<\/em>\u2018 \u2013 Latin for \u2018friends\u2019. That greeting is customary within the association during meetings. As the only national lead candidate she attracted a lot of attention, both on stage and during the break, where students took their chance for a selfie or an autograph.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\u201cI asked my campaign team to make time for a student debate, and I\u2019m glad they listened to me\u201d, said Bikker just before the debate began. \u201cWe must continue to invest in the future of young people.\u201d She emphasised three key points from the party programme: tackling the housing shortage, combating the penalty for studying too long, and promoting mental health. \u201cMore needs to be built so that students can find rooms again. And we must continue to focus on preventing mental health problems, because the number of young people struggling with this is growing.\u201d<\/p>\n

Freedom of education<\/h2>
\n

The debate itself consisted of two joint debates and four one-on-one debates. The atmosphere remained congenial and respectful throughout the evening, though there were occasional moments of healthy tension. For example, Steven van Die (CDA) and Johan Roodnat (SGP) were strikingly united in advocating more frequent use of electronic ankle tags in criminal law. More heat flared in the debate between Sarah el Boujdaini (D66) and Bikker over article 23 of the Constitution. D66 wants to modernise freedom of education, among other things by obliging schools to accept all pupils regardless of background or conviction. The ChristenUnie sees no need for this and emphasises the importance of parents being able to have their children educated in line with their deepest convictions, with Christian education playing an indispensable role in their view.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

In addition, issues such as mortgage interest deduction, migration and climate were discussed \u2013 themes that will play a major role in the coming elections. Especially during the migration debate it became clear that the Christian parties are strongly represented: the discussion quickly shifted from migration figures to the question of what \u2018Dutch culture\u2019 actually is, and how it can be protected.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

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

D66's Sarah el Boujdaini knows she is not speaking to a home audience.<\/span><\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure>

More fireworks<\/h2>
\n

Afterwards, not everyone found the tone sharp enough. Philosophy student Jasper missed depth: \u201cI expected a bit more fireworks. The candidates stayed very friendly, while the differences are large enough if you look at the party programmes. Fortunately, questions from the audience prompted some deeper conversations.\u201d His voting behaviour did not change during the evening: \u201cI vote strategically, but it was certainly educational.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Notable was the presence of the non-Christian parties. D66\u2019s Sarah el Boujdaini and GroenLinks-PvdA\u2019s Iris Vrolijks knew they faced a critical audience. \u201cI know I won\u2019t win preferential votes tonight\u201d, Vrolijks said with a laugh. \u201cBut it is important to tell our story here too, so that these young people do not base their view of us only on what they see in the media.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

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

For former business administration student Rien the evening helps to better understand the differences between the Christian parties.<\/span><\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure>

\n

A short poll among those present before and after the debate showed that the ChristenUnie strengthened its position: the percentage of students who want to vote for the party has risen from 30 to 36 per cent. The CDA lost ground, from 21 to 15 per cent, while the SGP remained stable in second place with 26 per cent of the vote.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Rien Bakker, former business administration student, summed up the evening: \u201cI found it an enriching evening. I already know I want to vote Christian, but this helps to better understand what the differences are. Tonight was a good start for me to think about that further.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Non-Christian parties are not an option for him, but Rien nonetheless appreciated the presence of D66 and GroenLinks-PvdA: \u201cIt was brave of them to stand here, despite knowing the audience disagrees with them on many points.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/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