What does NRC think | The PVV is rightly excluded as a government party, but the influence of Wilders extends further

It was not a nice face. Small, harmful to the appearance of politics. The week after the PVV had left the Cabinet Schoof, the three remaining parties of the now outgoing cabinet, VVD, NSC and BBB, continued with what they were so good at: arguing. It was about the distribution of the released cabinet posts for a week, or rather: about one post, that of the departed minister Marjolein Faber (asylum and migration, PVV). Everyone wants her portfolio, it turned out. There are elections that, as the expectation, are again dominated by the theme of asylum. Faber has left two asylum laws, which may still be treated before the elections. The remaining three parties want to make a good decorative with that. Because they wanted it all, the portfolio is now divided by the three parties. It is a political compromise that cannot be followed: the VVD receives the asylum measures Act, NSC receives ‘migration’, BBB the COA, which regulates the reception of asylum seekers.

For example, the parties do what they have (rightly) blamed for the PVV: that the party of Geert Wilders drew cynical politics about one theme. It cannot be explained to voters that they are now committed to the same thing. Moreover, it says something about the influence that the PVV still has, although their role has been played in the government. As if the PVV can again determine what the October elections can pass, determine the price of the following months, and the rest is neatly walking into the line. All parties now want to be strict on migration, especially asylum migration. And parties take over rhetoric and behavior of the PVV because they are afraid that the voter thinks they are soft. Suppose the PVV would not achieve any room seat in October (no realistic scenario), then the PVV thought would be safe. Everyone wants to be like the PVV, and the three leaders of the coalition parties continue to say that they do not see any light between their party and the PVV.

For example, Geert Wilders is almost certainly excluded from the next government participation, but his influence is greater than ever. It was the only correct decision of VVD leader Dilan Yesilgöz to the PVV this week to exclude. But the decision came late, only almost a week after the fall of the cabinet. It seemed that she wanted to appease unrest in the supporters. This Saturday the VVD will come together for a party congress, a liberal open day, as they call it. Yesilgöz cannot use a discussion about her leadership. The reason she gave for her decision was striking procedural in nature.

Wilders called them a ‘runaway’, who originated his responsibility. That is true, and a legitimate reason to assess the PVV as unsuitable. But Wilders’ ideas should have formed a much larger barrier. Wilders has been convicted of group insult by his ‘fewer Moroccans’ ruling of 2014, and has never renounced it. Wilders wants to ban the Quran, close mosques, and « de-Islamize » the Netherlands. Those ideas are at odds with the liberal ideas of the VVD and perpendicular to the democratic constitutional state. The refrigerator story has proved unbelievable. Yesilgöz should have said something about the exclusive, discriminatory and hate-sowing nature of the PVV ideas. The fact that she did not do that gives the impression that she is afraid that she will chase away the right wing of her party and disappointed PVV voters. But clarity about what the VVD stands for is not only morally correct, it will work to its advantage in the longer term. Parties such as the VVD have been lost under the influence of the PVV direction and eyes, without any self -confidence. If parties want to be credible alternatives for voters, then they have to do something about it.

That certainly does not only apply to the VVD. NSC and BBB also give the impression to no longer know. NSC, which entered into the Cabinet to monitor the rule of law, never has consequences associated with statements and views of PVV people in the cabinet. Not even when their only minister of color, Nora Achahbar, no longer felt at home in the cabinet. In the meantime, NSC says he agrees with the asylum plans of Marjolein Faber, and wanted to share the party in the honor. After the recent departure of Pieter Omtzigt, NSC has become a steering -free party, where there is fighting behind the scenes for party leadership. BBB is also in heavy weather, and there is a risk of having few seats. That party also sees the solution playing in PVV. Party leader Caroline van der Plas called this week the « curb of Islamization » one of the reasons why BBB is in the cabinet. That way, PVV is no longer needed. It is time for parties to invest more in their own story, even on the right, and respond less anxiously to everything that Wilders does.

To share

Mail the editors