“PVV now has the most political experience: We should be on our guard”
After the elections, numerous experienced politicians will not return to the Lower House or the cabinet. This is problematic, says Remieg Aerts, emeritus professor of parliamentary history. “Parties too often compile their lists on the basis of inclusiveness and diversity.”
Mark Rutte, Wopke Hoekstra, Sigrid Kaag, Carola Schouten and—youngest member of the House of Representatives—Kees van der Staaij. This is only a fraction of the long list of politicians who are calling it a day in political life in The Hague. Experienced parliamentarians are leaving the Lower House en masse.
New faces will replace them after the parliamentary elections on November 22nd. And the parliament now has 20 parties—including six one-person factions. What do these developments promise for the upcoming parliamentary term? Will the outflow of political experience be felt in the House of Representatives, and are the consequences foreseeable? Remieg Aerts, recently emeritus professor of history at the University of Amsterdam and parliamentary history at Nijmegen’s Radboud University, takes stock and looks ahead.
According to former 50-plus leader Henk Krol (now in second place on the BVNL list), as a member of parliament you need four years to get the hang of it and another four to master all the political tricks, and only after eight years do you figure out how things really work in the Lower House. Does that sound about right?
“That is indeed the average experience of members of parliament. Almost all of them say that only after eight years do you feel that you have really mastered the political work in The Hague. Only then do you understand the ins and outs of parliament.”
So how problematic is it that many politicians are leaving the House of Representatives?
“It is a very important consideration. Political experience is very crucial, and also very underrated. We have a tendency in the Netherlands to constantly want to think in terms of renewing democracy. That means that parties always want new people on the lists, often based on considerations such as inclusiveness and diversity.”
“Parties do their best to reflect the population in their lists as much as possible. But the question is whether that is a good starting point. As a party, is it better to look like your voters or to be able to do something for your voters? They are not the same thing.”
Which of the two do you think is more important?
“Obviously, as a party, you need diverse input to set the right agenda. But if you want to achieve something, you need experience and expertise in terms of legal, economic, and administrative knowledge, among other things.”
“You have to know how to question the government and counterbalance the enormous knowledge power it has with its huge civil service. That is mainly a matter of political experience.”
Shouldn’t parties—especially new ones—take this more into account? Pieter Omtzigt’s new party, Nieuw Sociaal Contract (NSC), for example, has relatively few people with political experience on the list. NSC, by the way, is at the top of the polls.
“There are indeed few people with parliamentary experience on Omtzigt’s list. But he has selected people who have expertise on major issues, such as healthcare and law. He is clearly focusing on that because that is where his own strengths lie: getting to the bottom of issues, continuing to ask questions about documents, and demanding transparency from officials.”
Really doing something for people is what makes a good elected representative. Renske Leijten of the SP did the same (she too has now left the Lower House, ed.). Not just shouting, continuing in campaign mode, and spouting your election program. MPs, even those with little experience, are nowadays especially good at representing their supporters. They increasingly function as a conduit for what is happening in society. Every riot leads to parliamentary questions or motions. So that representation function is very much alive at the moment.
2023 Emeritus. Farewell address: Lalla Rookh, or the delusion of science.
2022 Book, Denkend aan Nederland. On history, nationality and politics.
2018 Book, Thorbecke wants it. Biography of a statesman. For this he won the Dutch Biography Prize in 2020. Foliaspoke to him about this book in 2022.
2017 Professor of Dutch history at the University of Amsterdam
2013 Book, Land of small gestures
2011 Member of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW)
2003 Professor of Political History at Radboud University Nijmegen
1997 Doctorate at the University of Groningen on the 150-year history of the literary magazine De Gids
1957 born in Amsterdam
“But what the current, certainly inexperienced, MPs are much worse at is effectively controlling the government and co-sponsoring legislation (such as the government’s bills). In recent years we’ve seen how major problems result from that, of course.”
This also has to do with the workload. In practice, there is no way MPs can manage the sum total of all their duties.
“Yes, that’s true. A huge number of issues land on MPs’ desks. By spewing out large amounts of papers, the government can also paralyze parliament to a certain extent. As a member of parliament, you almost don’t know where to start.”
This is especially true within the small groups, I assume.
“There are 12 or 13 committees where all of parliament’s decisions are taken in advance; that’s where most of the work is done. So if you’re a small party with only three, four, or five seats you obviously can’t sit on all those committees. Those groups must then be represented by another party or they miss a whole lot.”
What can be done about this?
“First, a larger parliament. I would advocate that we enlarge parliament from 150 MPs to, say, 250, thereby making small parties larger to allow them to be represented on all committees.”
“Also, parliament should have more official support. There should also be an entire civil service, so to speak, to assist the Lower House. That could already make a difference. The way it is now, individual MPs must continually compete against a thousand civil servants in the ministries with their knowledge advantage.”
“You should create a solid mix of experienced and fresh new MPs within your party. Those experienced forces can then coach and create a division of labor. That could lead to improvement.”
“What we are seeing, by the way, is that a small opposition party can be much more effective than the size suggests, provided they know the rules of the game well. The PVV and the Party for the Animals, for example, are effective at that. They get things done not by betting on everything, but by forming coalitions behind the scenes, being very selective, and using political experience. And take note: The PVV faction now has the most political experience within the House.”
Is that a worrisome development in your opinion?
“We have to be very careful about that, yes. You have to ask yourself if this is something we really want to happen. We must be aware that this is a right-wing party that doesn’t exactly have the best interests of the rule of law at heart, and that they are in parliament mainly because of their grandstanding and have no desire to become pragmatic.”
Is that still the case? Now that outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte is leaving Dutch politics, the PVV seems to be seeking greater rapprochement with the VVD. Wilders wants to co-govern, he tells EenVandaag.
“Now the PVV is changing its tune somewhat, which is interesting in itself. But a party like the PVV, or the SP on the far left, is mainly interesting in sticking to its own principles. And playing to the public. They are not necessarily interested in political effectiveness.”
In conclusion, should we be concerned about this fragmentation in politics, too? Do we need measures such as an electoral threshold?
“I am not particularly in favor of that. In our system, it is also just as nice that a small group—for example, an emancipatory group or one that truly wants something different than other parties—can get political representation. A party like the Party for the Animals could not have entered parliament in 2006 with an electoral threshold. Now that they have been able to show their worth in parliament, they have been on the rise in subsequent elections. So we should not underestimate the impact of an electoral threshold.”
“Besides, it looks like we are going to have less fragmentation in the upcoming parliamentary term due to the rise of BBB, NSC, and the merger of PvdA and GroenLinks. These are interesting options for voters who are disenchanted or who were planning to vote for one of the existing splinter parties. We could well end up with a regrouping and some of the splinter parties staying out of parliament.”
“On top of that, at election time there are new dynamics. When there is a clear two-way fight, or now possibly even a three- or four-way fight, voters are usually pulled away from parties that they would have initially voted for as their first choice. After all, voters often want to vote strategically. So there’s going to be a strong pull effect there as well.”
