Ukraine-Netherlands:Time running out on Ukraine referendum - by Janene Pieters

The Dutch government is running out of time for finding a solution on what to do about ratifying the associatioin agreement between the European Union and Ukraine.

The deadline is November 1st. And it doesn't seem likely that a decision will be made on Friday, NU.nl reports.

"Today and in the coming days we are considerably going to talk about it", Minsiter Bert Koenders said, according to NU. "We still have a few days. We'll try to find a solution to the last moment."

Prime Minister Mark Rutte failed to find support among the opposition parties for a compromise. The compromise entails still ratifying the treaty, but also addressing the concerns of the voter majority that voted against the treaty in the Ukraine referendum in April.

The government wants a binding amendment added to the treaty which explicitly states that the treaty is not a prelude to EU membership for the Ukraine, that the Netherlands has the right to refrain from military cooperation and that extra money will not be transferred to the east European country. 

Note Almere Digest: The military component of this treaty is what most people who voted against it in the referendum are bothered by. The reason is simple: The majority of Dutch citizens don't want to continue to be part of US military adventures like the one the Netherlands is presently involved in the Middle East. A cruel and never ending war in Syria or Iraq, which is not only a total failure, but also costing the Dutch taxpayers millions of Euros, and the result of a massive flow of millions of refugees into  the EU.  

Read more: Time running out on Ukraine referendum | NL Times

The Netherlands: The 2017 Dutch parliamentary elections: A fragmented picture as Rutte and Wilders draw their battle lines: by Hans Vollaard

With only five months to go until the next parliamentary elections in the Netherlands, scheduled for March 2017, the country’s political parties are gearing up for the campaign. Debates over the annual budget in September gave a glimpse into the strategies of the main characters and how the main campaign themes of healthcare, migration and the economy might play out. The precise level of support each party will achieve is hard to predict due to the volatility of Dutch elections, but a fragmented parliament and a complicated coalition formation process are likely.

The elections for the Tweede Kamer, which is the most important chamber of parliament, will take place on 15 March if the present coalition government manages to serve its full term – which would be the first time this has occurred since 2002. Parties’ names and candidate lists should be registered with the Electoral Council in the coming months. The election will use a proportional representation system across a single nationwide constituency, ensuring the share of the 150 seats each party will receive is in line with the number of votes they obtain.

At present, the Tweede Kamer harbours 15 parliamentary groups, including five splinter groups. The current government relies on the support of the right-wing VVD of Prime Minister Mark Rutte (40 seats) and the centre-left PvdA (36 seats). The latter is internationally known for its Minister of Finance, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the chair of the Eurogroup (the ministers of finance of the Eurozone countries).

The recent budget debate underlined Rutte’s status as an able survivor in Dutch politics. Since becoming prime minister after elections in 2010 and 2012, he has shown sufficient flexibility to gain majority support for a series of major reforms to sustain the welfare state in the fragmented first and second chambers of parliament. Rutte now sits at the centre of the VVD’s campaign as the party looks toward 2017.

The leaders of the opposition parties will mostly be the same as in the last election in 2012, from the Animal Rights Party to the pensioners’ party, 50Plus. Only the small GroenLinks and ChristenUnie parties have changed leaders among the main players, although the PvdA still has to decide on a new leader (with its present parliamentary leader Diederik Samson one of the candidates). A new party, Denk, which split-off from the PvdA, will campaign for the sake of migrants and their descendants. On the right, two new parties are to be led by the leading faces of the referendum campaign against the EU-Ukraine Treaty which took place in April.

At present, the VVD’s main opponent is the anti-Islam and anti-EU Party for Freedom (PVV), led by Geert Wilders, which has topped some recent polls. The VVD is in favour of fiscal austerity and a (European) free market, while it also advocates tough anti-crime and anti-terrorism policies, and is strict on migration and integration. The budget debate showed how the VVD has sought to distinguish itself from Wilders and the PVV. The party has emphasised its role in steering the Netherlands through economically difficult times and has also underlined that everyone should accept Dutch norms and values: that is, that Muslims and migrants should accept, but can also enjoy the country’s constitutional freedoms.

Read more: EUROPP – The 2017 Dutch parliamentary elections: A fragmented picture as Rutte and Wilders draw their battle lines

The Netherlands: Dutch Discontent Could Derail General Elections - by Marcel Michelson

The Netherlands is holding general elections in March 2017, the result of which will determine the make-up of the next government.

Mark Rutte, the liberal Prime Minister, is expected to lead his party for the third time and some commentators already expect a third Rutte coalition government but this time possibly not with the PVDA Labour party.

Yet the outcome could be drastically different. The Dutch government and Rutte think they have done a good job and the last annual state budget even contained some presents despite the Dutch’ tight hold on the purse strings.

But the noise in the lowlands is not about how cosy the country is, how nice the purchasing power, how decent the unemployment figures.

It is more about fraud scandals at semi-public institutions, pocket-lining local politicians, sporadic clashes with young Dutch descendants of immigrant families, and the new waves of refugees housed in special complexes all over the country.

The old political system in the Netherlands is falling apart.

For many decades, moderate religious parties in the centre held power even though they had to merge over time to keep the majority.

There were coalitions with either the labour party to the left or the liberals to the right, with a sprinkling of other smaller parties to make up the numbers.

But cooperation is not that easy anymore and the Dutch are not as happy as they seem.

In the wake of late populist politician Pim Fortuyn, shot dead in 2002 by an animal rights activist, Geert Wilders has been garnering a lot of protests votes with his anti-immigration and anti-EU stand.

Wilders has called for a Nexit, Dutch exit from the European Union, after Brexit.

He has been joined in this call by a new party; the Forum for Democracy.

Their leader Thierry Baudet wants more referenda, about the euro for instance and immigration, so that the Dutch citizens are more involved in the political process instead of the four-yearly delegation of power to parliament.

Baudet, and other politicians, are angered that the Dutch government has not implemented the result of a consultative referendum over a treaty with Ukraine.

While less than a third of the Dutch voted in the referendum in April this year, 61 per cent rejected the EU association agreement with Ukraine. The government of Mark Rutte, holding the EU presidency at that time, has so far ignored the result and thereby angered many citizens.

Immigration is also a key issue. While the Netherlands has often prided itself on its tolerance and hospitality, behind the curtains in the living room windows there are now harsher discussions.

On the one hand, Dutch youngsters from immigrant descent are held responsible for petty crimes and proselytism, while on the other hand some descendants of immigrants are demanding the Netherlands to abandon parts of its culture and traditions that hark back to the slave trade.

The annual children’s party of Sinterklaas in December, the Dutch variant on Santa Claus, has turned into an opinion battlefield due to the presence of Black Peter, black-faced helpers. For some, these helpers put the black community in a bad light and remind them of the slavery trade, while for others the blackened-faces are no more than disguises so that the children do not recognise the family members or neighbours who assist Sinterklaas, himself unrecognisable behind a large white beard, long hair and a bishop’s mitre and costume.

Another new party, Denk, is calling for a renewed balance in the Netherlands for all groups of Dutch people, irrespective of their family roots. The founders and leaders of Denk were members of the Labour Party with Turkish ancestors.

A leader of an organisation of Dutch people with Moroccan origins will also present himself on the Denk (“Think” in Dutch) list.

Denk would like better recognition of Palestine, less obstacles to private initiatives for education, Chinese, Arab and Turkish as options in basic education and a national racism register to fight racism.

With the children of the multi-cultural society in the Netherlands calling for mutual understanding and respect and the die-hard Dutch wanting to retreat in the polders behind closed borders, there is hardly a trace left of the “consensus” so dear to Dutch political tradition.

The country once known for its outward-looking attitude and knack for international trade and business seems stuck in an endless search for personal happiness in a cosy cocoon, and increasingly disconnected from the outside world.

Read more: Dutch Discontent Could Derail General Elections - EU And Immigration In Focus

Europe's Future Is Federal - by Jean Tirole

Numerous Europeans view Europe as a one-way street: they appreciate its advantages but are little inclined to accept common rules. An increasing number throughout the Union are handing their vote to populist parties – Front National, Syriza, Podemos – that surf on this Eurosceptic wave and rise up against “foreign”- imported constraints.

Embroiled with the Greek crisis, European policymakers will soon have to step back and reflect on the broader issue of the Eurozone’s future. Before envisaging an exit or, on the contrary, more sustained integration, it’s right to reflect upon the consequences of each option.

Oversimplifying, there are three strategies for the Eurozone: a minimalist approach that would see a return to national currencies, while keeping Europe perhaps as a free trade area and retaining a few institutions that have made a real difference such as common competition laws; the current approach based on the Maastricht Treaty of 1992 and its fiscal compact update in 2012; and, finally, the more ambitious version of federalism. My own clear preference is for the federalist version but I’m not at all convinced that Europeans are ready to make it work successfully.

Note EU-Digest:  Federalism is probably the only way to go if Europe does not want to become subservient to the presently ruling superpowers, China, the US, and even Russia. Populism and nationalism is not the way to go, as it has always turned sour in Europe's history. True federalism would certainly require finding another historic shining political star like Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who has the ability to get the EU reorganized, and all the EU member states moving in the same direction. Let's hope we get blessed soon in finding that "needle in the political haystack" to rescue the EU out of the iron grip of the Wall Steet dominated financial community.

Read more: Europe's Future Is Federal » Social Europe

The European Commission: The Secret Mission Of VP Frans Timmermans - by Rene Cuperus:

Frans Timmermans the EU's point man

Frans Timmermans former Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs (Social Democrat)  is now Juncker’s number two in the new European Commission. Formally in charge of ‘Better Regulation, Inter-Institutional Relations, the Rule of Law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights,’ his more difficult undertaking will likely be the informal task of keeping the UK in the EU.

The 2013 Dutch Kings’s Speech (Speech from the Throne, ‘’Troonrede’’) by Dutch King William Alexander at the opening of the new Dutch parliamentary year, provoked a lot of reactions, both domestically and internationally. In the speech, it seemed as if the Dutch post-war welfare state was abolished, substituted by a so-called ‘’participation society’’ based on mutual individualism.

This was only partly true. Indeed, the coalition of conservative liberals (VVD) and social-democrats (PvdA) did design and put into action an unprecedented decentralisation operation towards city councils and social organizations (care, employment), but in terms of rights, one cannot seriously argue that the Netherlands is getting rid of its welfare state.

This popular Dutch Foreign Minister is now ‘’the second man’’ of the new Juncker European Commission. It is unclear at this moment whether his portfolio in the Commission as ‘’First Vice-President, in charge of Better Regulation, Inter-Institutional Relations, the Rule of Law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights’’ is really a powerful job in the Berlaymont hierarchy. 

Some say that given his personality, language skills, and good connections with Juncker, as well as his huge European and international network, Timmermans will perform outside the boundaries of his formal functional profile, and will play an important role in international affairs and European foreign policy. He might even become one of the strongest figureheads for European Social Democracy political grouping in Brussels.

I (Rene Cuperus) myself argued – in an article writtenearlier  together with Adriaan Schout of Clingendael, the Dutch Chatham House – that the secret mission for Frans Timmermans might be helping to prevent ‘’Brexit’’ from happening.

Read more: Rene Cuperus: The Secret Mission Of Frans Timmermans

Dutch VVD-PVDA Coalition Government In Deep Trouble After Resignation of Justice Minister, Secretary, in Drug Payoff

Dutch Justice Minister Ivo Opstelten and his state secretary, Fred Teeven, have resigned after "misleading" or as a parliamentarian said "for blowing smoke" to members of parliament over a 2001 compensation payment to a convicted drug trafficker.

Mr Opstelten had said the trafficker was paid less than he actually was for money wrongly confiscated by the state. He also said details of the payment - authorized by Mr Teeven as the prosecutor during that time - had been lost, but it turned not to be so.

The resignations are a blow to the conservative party VVD as it faces an election.

Mr Opstelten and Mr Teeven are both from the conservative wing of the party which governs the Netherlands together with the labor party, and is faces a challenge from Geert Wilders' far-right Freedom Party in provincial elections this month.

The resignations are also expected to place a strain on the Conservatives coalition with the Labour party, which has been very critical of Mr Opstelten and Mr Teeven.

This tidal wave of political unrest in the VVD-PVDA coalition could very well be"the straw that breaks the camels back" of the Dutch Government..

EU-Digest

Greece: Which Side Are You On, Jeroen Dijsselbloem? - by David Lizoain

Just over a hundred years have passed since the greatest failure of European social democracy. The workers’ movement was unable to halt the needless slaughter of World War I. First, Jean Jaures was assassinated, silencing his powerful anti-militarist voice. Soon after, the German SPD voted to authorize war credits for the Kaiser. Proletarian internationalism gave way to social patriotism.

Between the collapse of the Second International during the war and the divergent responses to the Russian Revolution, a rift opened up between socialists and communists in Europe that persists until this day.

Representatives of these two political traditions now find themselves at odds in a Eurogroup presided by Jeroen Dijsselbloem of the Dutch PvdA. The backdrop is one where events in the Balkans have the capability of triggering a much bigger conflict. And once more a situation has arisen where ultimatums issued by the strong against the weak run the risk of only making the conflagration worse.

The key points of disagreement are not technical but political. The eventual size of Greece’s primary surplus, for instance, is important for economic but also symbolic reasons. The real issue is what sort of Europe will emerge out of the ongoing negotiations.

One possible outcome is a deepening of a Europe split on debtor-creditor lines, organized in a manner that leads to an ever-increasing divergence between the core and the periphery. This is a Europe divided into those who give charity and those who beg for alms, as opposed to a Europe with automatic mechanisms of solidarity. This is a Europe acting as a potent incubator for mutual recriminations and rapid breakdowns in good will.

Merkel, Rajoy, and Passos Coelho all favour this outcome. In spite of their different national circumstances, they are united in their preference for a hard line on account of shared preferences and a shared project. The ties that bind them are ideological.

Many social democrats too are reproducing the debtor-creditor fault line. In the midst of the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression, with democracy being hollowed out, with inequality on the rise, and with the far right on the march, social democracy is once more unable to act as a cohesive European actor. And the rise of Syriza has exposed its internal contradictions.

Read more: Which Side Are You On, Jeroen Dijsselbloem?

The Netherlands: Does the Netherlands risk losing foreign investment to Britain' if letter box companies are closed down?

The Netherlands may lose its advantage when it comes to attracting foreign investment because other countries such as Britain are making their tax regimes more attractive, says the Financieele Dagblad in one of their reports recently.

The paper bases its claim on interviews with lobby groups and tax advisers.

For example, Amcham, the American Chamber of Commerce in the Netherlands, has warned deputy finance minister Frans Weekers that American firms are regularly opting for London rather than the Netherlands, the paper says.

Both new firms and existing companies such as holdings are turning to Britain.

Amcham points out that while three-quarters of the US capital which comes into the Netherlands moves out again via letterbox companies, the money which remains is more than French, German and Belgian investments combined.

Note EU-Digest: In their report Het Financiele Dagblad seems to be lobbying  for Tax Evading companies and their advisers. They fail to report that Dutch laws are completely different from British laws when it concerns tax evasion and Letter-Box companies. Letter-Box companies which are closed down can only go to Britain or any other country in the EU unless they comply with local  tax laws. Let's hope the EU Commission does not fall asleep on this issue and ends the opportunities created for multi-nationals to evade taxes through legal loopholes in the EU.

Read more: DutchNews.nl - 'The Netherlands risks losing foreign investment to Britain'

The Netherlands: Unrest In The Labor Party (PVDA) About JSF Purchase And Other Issues Could Topple Rutte Government

The former Dutch Vice-PM, Finance Minister and (PVDA) Labor party leader Wouter Bos, who writes a bi-weekly column for the well know Dutch Volkskrant newspaper  recently expressed his dismay in this column about the present Dutch Government of Mark Rutte's turn to what he called a "classical liberal American and ultimately marginalizing participative society".

"Even The King was allowed to announce that the established Dutch welfare state was going to make place for this so-called "participation society", said Bos 

Bos noted: "If the participation society as expressed in the speech from the throne on "Prinsjesdag" is not only the view of the  PM Rutte, but also that of  the Coalition (which includes the PVDA labor party), than the labor party must have gone through an ideological revolution... please tell me that this is not the case".

Given the unrest in the labor party on several actions undertaken by the government, including the recent decision by Defence Minister Jeanine Hennis and the government to abruptly finalize the year-long discussions about the JSF by unilaterally choosing to purchase 37 JSFs for the air-force at more than 5 billion euro's, has created a swell of protest not only in PVDA  circles, but around the country.

This could lead to a situation, if the present Labor party (PVDA) parliamentary leader Diederik Samsom does not succeed in holding his parliamentary fraction together, whereby several Labor party members would cast their votes in parliament with the opposition against the proposed government budget, and toppling the Rutte government. 

EU-Digest

Netherlands: Dutch to buy JSF fighter jets in 4.5-bn-euro deal - question is - can Holland afford or need the JSF?

Global Post reports the Netherlands wants to buy 37 new F-35 Joint Strike Fighters (JSF) from US-based Lockheed Martin in a deal worth 4.5 billion euros ($6 billion) to replace its ageing fleet of F-16s by 2019, the country's defense minister said Tuesday.

Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert announced the long-debated purchase in a letter to parliament at the presentation of the government's 2014 budget at the Lower House's official opening in The Hague. afford

"In view of our current planning, the F-35 (also known as the Joint Strike Fighter) will go into service by 2019," operating from two Dutch air force bases, the minister said.

"After evaluating competitors in 2001 and 2008 and with updated relevant data in 2013, the cabinet has decided, based on operational and financial considerations, to choose the F-35 as the new fighter plane for the Dutch armed forces," she said.

The choice had been widely expected, with the Netherlands closely involved as one of the contributing countries to the JSF's development.

As early as 1997, the JSF has been flagged as the preferential candidate to replace the Dutch fleet of F-16s because of its stealth features, which make it almost invisible to radar.

In 2002, the Netherlands and eight other countries joined the fighter's development phase.
But a finalized Dutch purchase had been rejected in parliament, mainly by the centre-left Labour Party (PvdA) while in opposition.

However, that decision changed after Labour formed a majority coalition in the Lower House with Prime Minister Mark Rutte's Liberal party (VVD) after last September's elections.

The bottom line however is: can the Netherlands afford an expense of   4.5 billion euro's for this airplane while the Dutch taxpayer is asked to make all kinds of sacrifices to meet Government austerity measures. In addition the Government is buying into an airplane which has been plagued by problems.

An other problem is that the Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program continues to trigger new controversies. Latest comments allege flawed estimates of the jet's weight and, as before, questions about the timeline for the plane's delivery and final cost.

The F-35 was spotlighted in technical troubles in addition to debates over its costs. In February the U.S. Department of Defense suspended flights of all 51 F-35 planes after a routine inspection revealed a crack on a turbine blade in the jet engine of an F-35 test aircraft.

Outgoing Executive Vice President and JSF General Manager Tom Burbage was quoted in the news media as saying the manufacturer miscalculated on the aircraft's weight during its early development.

The question remains: should the Netherlands cut their losses on the JSF and pull out of the project or go deeply into debt with a project which is extremely questionable? 

EU-Digest

Netherlands: If Elections Were Held Today Coalition Government Would Suffer Smashing Defeat - Says Polster

According to Dutch pollster Maurice de Hond the Dutch government coalition parties VVD (Conservative) and PvdA (Labor) would, if elections were held today, together get only 34 seats, 21 for the VVD and 13 for the PvdA.  A loss of 45 seats compared to last years election

The PVV ( Party for Freedom) of anti-Islam and anti-immigration Geert Wilders, who as his opponents say is better know for his "one liner's" rather than his political realism would double it's membership base in the Dutch parliament from 15 to 30 seats and become the biggest party in the parliament.

Almere-Digest

Dutch Government Planned Student Loan Program Could Fail Based On US Experience

As the costs of higher education continue to skyrocket across the USA and Europe, the student loan debt bubble in America is reaching unprecedented heights as more and more young adults are not able to repay their loans.

A new analysis from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in America  found that only half of the more than $1 trillion in student loan debt is being repaid. Specifically, only 42 percent of direct student loans are in repayment while 60 percent of Federal Family Education Loans are in repayment.

The CFPB also found that 13-14 percent of borrowers are defaulting on their loan, which will have secondary effects of making things like buying a home or a car that much more difficult. Experts have said this could create an entire generation of students who can’t achieve the American dream.

An additional 18 percent of former students are either in deferment, putting off paying the loan, or in forbearance because they don’t make enough money to be able to pay the loan and make payments on the rest of their bills.

The CFPB said there are several ways to reduce payments including a plan called Pay As You Earn where payments are equal to 10 percent of your income above the poverty line and after 20 years any remaining balance is forgiven.

The main issue with the government-backed student loans, however, is that these loans have created an education bubble. Both Stafford loans and private bank loans are given to essentially anyone who applies, and this has inflated the cost of education overall. On an individual level, even if a person was to declare bankruptcy later in life, his or her student loans will still stick.

Therefore, banks can make risky loans to students because they know that the government will still back those loans. In addition, with the ease of loan dispersal, students feel less of an incentive to choose degrees that will allow them to easily pay back their student loans and may instead choose programs with less job security.

Unlike 30-50 years ago, it’s nearly impossible for students today to graduate on time without the assistance of student loans or military grants. While scholarships can be a viable answer for some students—particularly those who are eligible for need-based financial aid—the majority of students can’t rely on scholarships and grants alone. So not only are loans necessary to achieve academic goals, but the costs of those goals are increasing as a result of government-backed loans. Like during the housing market crisis, prices are rapidly inflating, but people who aren’t particularly good loan candidates are still getting them because banks know that if borrowers default, then the government will bail them out.

Pursuing higher education is a valuable endeavor and can definitely result in a higher quality of life in the long run. For many, loans are the only way to afford an education. But the ease of receiving government loans is a double-edged sword that both expedites the process for people with solid career prospects and encourages risky behavior by making it easier for students to get degrees that won’t necessarily be valuable in the job market. While the increase in student loan rates is a hardship for most, what may be an even greater hardship is the difficulty of making ends meet later in life, when crippling student loan debt prevents individuals from getting what they want from their careers.

The Dutch government should take note of the above, given the very negative results achieved with the program in the US.

For more: EU-Digest