tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/mark-rutte-13394/articlesMark Rutte – The Conversation2021-06-10T14:56:29Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1572902021-06-10T14:56:29Z2021-06-10T14:56:29ZDutch elections show the promise and perils of proportional representation<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405401/original/file-20210609-14971-szflz2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C6016%2C3413&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">People stand in line waiting to vote in the Hague in the Netherlands.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Dutch elections were <a href="https://www.euronews.com/2021/03/17/mark-rutte-s-party-wins-most-seats-in-dutch-general-election-exit-poll-suggests">held almost three months ago</a>, but it’s still unclear who will form the next government. This is normal in the Netherlands, <a href="https://www.expatica.com/nl/living/gov-law-admin/netherlands-political-system-100756/">where all governments are coalitions because no party ever wins a majority of the seats</a>. </p>
<p>After the March 2017 elections, the new government wasn’t installed until October, a <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-netherlands-government-idUSKBN1CV15D">record-setting 225 days after the elections</a>. That government included four parties; the new government now being negotiated is likely to include five or more.</p>
<p>With the single member plurality electoral system — known as “first past the post” — Canadians are used to quick results. On the rare occasions that no single party wins a majority of seats, the parties quickly determine if they can govern as a minority with support from other parties, as the current Liberal government is doing. </p>
<p>The first-past-the-post system, however, distorts the results. <a href="https://theconversation.com/federal-election-frustrations-for-the-greens-highlight-electoral-system-flaws-again-125621">In the 2019 Canadian election</a>, Justin Trudeau’s Liberals won 46 per cent of seats with only 33 per cent of the votes while the Conservatives won 36 per cent of seats with 34 per cent of the votes. </p>
<p>Despite winning more than twice as many votes as the Bloc Québecois, with nine per cent of seats at under eight per cent of the votes, the NDP won only seven per cent of seats, the Greens won only three seats despite winning almost seven per cent of the votes, and no other party won seats. </p>
<h2>Proportional representation</h2>
<p>By contrast, elections in the Netherlands operate with pure proportional representation, with no threshold. To win one of the 150 seats in the Dutch parliament, a party needs only 1/150th of the votes — currently around 70,000. </p>
<p>Most countries using proportional representation have an electoral threshold, often five per cent, so parties winning less than that don’t win seats. Because so few votes are needed to win a seat in the Dutch parliament, <a href="https://www.verkiezingsuitslagen.nl/verkiezingen/detail/TK20210317">37 parties ran candidates and 17 parties elected representatives</a>.</p>
<p>Had Canada used the Dutch system in 2019, the Conservatives would have had a few more seats than the Liberals (who would have had far fewer seats), the Bloc would have had fewer, the NDP and Greens would have had more, and even Maxime Bernier’s People’s Party would have won a few seats. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-canadian-election-results-would-have-looked-like-with-electoral-reform-125848">What the Canadian election results would have looked like with electoral reform</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This splintered political landscape in the Netherlands is relatively new. As recently as 2012, the government could be formed with only two parties: Mark Rutte’s conservative Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie party, known as VVD (41 seats) in coalition with Labour (38 seats). In earlier years, the largest party often won 50 or more seats. </p>
<p>The fact that every vote counts means that participation in Dutch elections is high: 79 per cent voted in March, a slight dip from the 82 per cent who voted in the previous elections — but far above the <a href="https://elections.ca/content.aspx?section=ele&dir=turn&document=index&lang=e">67 per cent of Canadian voters who turned out in 2019 and the 59 per cent who voted in 2008</a>.</p>
<h2>New ideas, emerging trends</h2>
<p>Proportional representation also means that new ideas and societal trends quickly enter parliament. A Green party and an anti-immigration party both won seats as early as the 1980s, and the new Dutch parliament includes <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/02/caged-bunnies-budgies-may-outlawed-netherlands/">representatives of an animal rights party</a>, several religious parties, a party for pensioners, a farmer’s party and <a href="https://voltnederland.org/">three members of the pan-European party Volt</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="A man in a suit and tie waves" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405390/original/file-20210609-14704-16vyxfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405390/original/file-20210609-14704-16vyxfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405390/original/file-20210609-14704-16vyxfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405390/original/file-20210609-14704-16vyxfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=410&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405390/original/file-20210609-14704-16vyxfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405390/original/file-20210609-14704-16vyxfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405390/original/file-20210609-14704-16vyxfl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=515&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte arrives for an EU summit in Sweden in 2017.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Virginia Mayo)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>With proportional representation combined with a divided society, one might expect chaos and instability. Yet the opposite is often true: Rutte has been in office since 2010 and is widely expected to continue as prime minister, despite <a href="https://apnews.com/article/mark-rutte-netherlands-europe-elections-338dc3293ec7bf1ac206c9f3659caea1">parliament passing a motion of censure against him</a>.</p>
<p>Because VVD won the most votes, the party won’t drop him as leader. And the other potential governing parties do not appear to have the appetite or the numbers to cobble together the complex coalition required to govern without the VVD. </p>
<p>Similarly, it took a <a href="https://time.com/6053465/israel-netanyahu-coalition/">coalition of eight parties in Israel to oust prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu</a>, who had been prime minister since 2009. It’s common to see only incremental change rather than huge swings under proportional representation systems.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/after-12-years-of-netanyahu-heres-what-to-expect-from-a-new-coalition-government-in-israel-162054">After 12 years of Netanyahu, here's what to expect from a new coalition government in Israel</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>By contrast, in first-past-the-post systems, small changes in vote share can lead to large swings. In the 2004 federal election, for example, Stephen Harper’s Conservatives dropped from 38 per cent to 30 per cent of votes, but <a href="https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=eim/issue16&document=p9&lang=e">actually increased their seats, from 78 to 99</a>. The Liberal vote share, meantime, dipped slightly from 41 per cent to 37 per cent but they fell dramatically, from 172 to 135 seats.</p>
<h2>Low-drama elections</h2>
<p>Elections under proportional representation tend to be less dramatic because the seats accurately reflect the vote share — though in the 2017 Dutch elections, Labour suffered a historic defeat.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405395/original/file-20210609-14856-121blza.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Geert Wilders with a microphone in the foreground" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405395/original/file-20210609-14856-121blza.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405395/original/file-20210609-14856-121blza.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405395/original/file-20210609-14856-121blza.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405395/original/file-20210609-14856-121blza.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405395/original/file-20210609-14856-121blza.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405395/original/file-20210609-14856-121blza.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405395/original/file-20210609-14856-121blza.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Dutch far-right leader Geert Wilders addresses the media at the Belgian federal parliament in Brussels in 2017.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Geert Vanden Wijngaert)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It dropped from 25 per cent of the votes (38 seats) to under six per cent (nine seats), which they repeated this year. </p>
<p>Geert Wilders dropped from 20 seats to 17 while the upstart Forum for Democracy party grew from two in the 2017 elections to eight seats with five per cent of the vote — a far cry from the results of the 2019 provincial elections, where Forum rocketed to first place with almost 15 per of the votes. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Thierry Baudet casts a ballot." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405396/original/file-20210609-15050-3jycm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/405396/original/file-20210609-15050-3jycm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=455&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405396/original/file-20210609-15050-3jycm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=455&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405396/original/file-20210609-15050-3jycm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=455&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405396/original/file-20210609-15050-3jycm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=571&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405396/original/file-20210609-15050-3jycm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=571&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/405396/original/file-20210609-15050-3jycm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=571&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Thierry Baudet, leader of the populist party Forum for Democracy, casts his ballot in the European elections in 2019 in Amsterdam.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Peter Dejong)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Forum leader Thierry Baudet’s <a href="https://more.bham.ac.uk/populism-in-action/2021/01/15/the-dutch-far-right-in-2021-a-view-from-the-ground/">controversial statements and conspiracy theories</a> dimmed his prospects. </p>
<p>But he won some votes by campaigning against COVID-19 lockdown measures, while also enabling a new right-wing party led by two former Forum members to win three seats.</p>
<h2>Low geographic representation</h2>
<p>Pure proportional representation does not ensure geographic representation. The Netherlands has a <a href="https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/dashboard-bevolking">population of over 17 million people</a> in an area smaller than Nova Scotia. Yet even in such a small country, there are regional differences, and the existing electoral rules do a poor job of translating those differences into seats. </p>
<p>For example, while every one of Canada’s 338 MPs represents a specific geographic constituency, the most recent Dutch elections resulted in only one representative each from two of its 11 provinces; most representatives come from the <a href="https://www.britannica.com/place/Randstad">dominant Randstad</a>.</p>
<p>This problem inspired one of the recommendations of the <a href="https://www.staatscommissieparlementairstelsel.nl/actueel/nieuws/2019/07/18/download-the-english-translation-of-the-final-report-of-the-state-commission">parliamentary commission on the state of democracy in the Netherlands</a> — introducing a personal and regional component by assigning greater weight to preference votes. Dutch voters can vote for any candidate running for any party, but candidates now need one-quarter of the general threshold (approximately 17,500 votes) to jump ahead of their colleagues on the party list and win a seat.</p>
<p>The outgoing government supports the commission’s proposal, and if the new parliament agrees, it <a href="https://www.internetconsultatie.nl/burgerforum">could be in place in time for the 2023 elections</a>. By contrast, various proposals for proportional representation in Canada have so far failed to become law, despite considerable public support and a <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-electoral-reform-proportional-representation-1.5225616">promise from Trudeau that the 2015 elections would be the last held under the first-past-the-post system</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/157290/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Willem Maas does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The March elections in the Netherlands, and the fact that a government still hasn’t been formed, illustrate both the benefits and problems with proportional representation.Willem Maas, Jean Monnet Chair and Professor of Political Science, Socio-Legal Studies, and Public & International Affairs, York University, CanadaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1569932021-03-19T12:37:26Z2021-03-19T12:37:26ZDutch elections: Mark Rutte wins another term but fragmented results mask continuing popularity of the far right<p>For the fourth time in a row, the liberal-conservative party VVD has <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56436297">won the Dutch general elections</a>. Prime Minister Mark Rutte, one of the longest serving leaders in Europe, will hold on to that status despite a <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56393820">tumultuous year</a>. </p>
<p>The VVD’s victory was predicted but the electoral gains made by one of its coalition partners in the last government – the social liberal D66 – were more surprising. Led by Sigrid Kaag, a multilingual former diplomat and ardent supporter of the European Union, D66 has become the second largest party in the Netherlands. That could force Rutte to orientate his future policy in a more pro-European direction. </p>
<p>As Rutte ruled out any form of cooperation with the two main radical right-wing parties – <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/geert-wilders-4827">Geert Wilders’</a> Party for Freedom (PVV) and Forum for Democracy (FVD) – he will have to engage with others. And in an increasingly fragmented political landscape, the VVD has more parties to choose from than ever. The 150-seat Dutch parliament will have 17 parties after this election result. It might take a while to form the government but it will probably end up being a broad continuation of the last. That means the VVD and D66 working with the Christian Democrats (who lost a few seats). They’ll need one other party to obtain a parliamentary majority. </p>
<p>But anyone thinking these results spell the end of nationalist-populist movements in the Netherlands should look closer. The PVV lost a few seats but if you combine its vote share with those of two other more recently established radical parties – JA21 and FVD (the only party that campaigned on anti-lockdown and anti-vaccination rhetoric) – the Dutch far right has won more seats than ever before.</p>
<h2>Beware the opposition</h2>
<p>In such a fragmented political landscape, opposition is a competitive yet interesting place to be. Holding a governing coalition together is difficult at the best of times, but Rutte has to tread the line between a large number of parties. That leaves space for radical right parties to continue to build their electoral prospects while presenting themselves as outsiders. They can propose radical change and criticise the government over an array of issues – including the poor quality of welfare state services, financial aid being sent to other countries and a lack of law and order – without having to assume any responsibilities. </p>
<p>Both within the Netherlands and beyond, this diversity of issues enables the far right to thrive. That’s because their constituency, too, is highly diverse. </p>
<p>To better understand the diversity behind the radical right vote, I travelled through France and the Netherlands for several years, holding <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/roads-to-the-radical-right-9780198863632?lang=en&cc=en">in-depth interviews</a> with 125 citizens who supported Wilders and France’s Marine Le Pen. The backgrounds of the voters I spoke with differed enormously. Some were highly educated, others less so, Some were old, some were young. Some were millionaires living in penthouses and others were unemployed and in social housing. </p>
<p>Voters with different profiles turned out to hold very different motives for voting for the same party. For instance, citizens I met in socially disadvantageous positions (low levels of education and income) principally claimed that they were unfairly disadvantaged with respect to migrants and asylum seekers. They particularly spoke about social housing, health care and elderly care in this context.</p>
<p>By contrast, small business owners and employees in the private sector were less likely to believe that they received too little. Instead, they said they felt they gave too much, especially to non-native outgroups who were believed to violate their work ethic – such as “lazy Greeks”, “profiteers in Brussels”, and “fortune seekers” benefiting from their tax contributions. Other voters I spoke to from the more well-off segments of society primarily voted PVV based on ideological considerations. They were denouncing non-native outgroups (especially Muslims), who they felt lacked the willingness to assimilate into (and so threaten) the native majority culture.</p>
<p>The key to understanding Wilders’ continuing electoral appeal, and that of his political allies, lies in the particular way in which he taps into these
variegated demands. He invokes an overarching opposition between native-versus-foreign in different issue domains, including identity, European integration, Islam, security and welfare chauvinism. </p>
<p>Like other nativist leaders, he opposes a broad “us” – including, in his case, the “hardworking”, “elderly”, “Judeo-Christian” as well as “ordinary” Dutch – to a broad range of non-native outgroups (“them”), that would threaten “our” traditions, freedom, identity and prosperity. Precisely this overarching opposition allows his diverse voters to identify themselves with the same nativist agenda.</p>
<p>In other words, Wilders’ boundaries between “us” and “them” are multiple and flexible (as the PVV-leader recently illustrated, during the COVID crisis, when attacking the Dutch government’s decision to financially support Italians rather than its own population). Yet they are all based on the same nativist principle, according to which “our people” should be put first. </p>
<h2>Post-pandemic politics</h2>
<p>Rutte has held onto his popularity by presenting himself as the national crisis manager who pragmatically steered his country through the pandemic. But at some point, a debate on political accountability will unavoidably unfold, including questions on how well prepared his government was for the crisis. This blame game might negatively affect the next government, especially if the composition of the coalition is similar to the last government.</p>
<p>At some point other political issues will return to the fore and the far right will be on more comfortable political ground. When migration begins to rise again after the pandemic, for example, Wilders will be reminded of how he soared in the polls during the refugee crisis of a few years ago. Similarly, the nativist right will see an opportunity in any talk of post-pandemic financial “solidarity” between European nations.</p>
<p>Comfortably installed in the opposition benches, Dutch MPs on the radical right will be more numerous than ever. They shouldn’t be expected to fade into obscurity in the years to come.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/156993/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Koen Damhuis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There will be 17 parties in the 150-seat parliament – and the radical right holds more of them than ever.Koen Damhuis, Assistant Professor, Utrecht University School of Governance, Utrecht UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/927052018-03-06T10:49:34Z2018-03-06T10:49:34ZWhy the Dutch plan to scrap advisory referendums is a step back for democracy<p>Dutch voters will go to the polls on March 21 for a referendum on the <a href="http://www.jurist.org/paperchase/2017/11/netherlands-to-hold-referendum-on-surveillance-law.php">Security Act 2017</a>, a law which grants the authorities extended surveillance rights.</p>
<p>As in many other states, such legislation has raised concern in the Netherlands that the government is snooping on emails and other personal communication. </p>
<p>Unlike most countries, however, Dutch voters can currently do something about it thanks to a 2015 law that means the government <a href="https://www.meerdemocratie.nl/dutch-consultative-referendum-law-overview">must hold an advisory referendum</a> if 300,000 voters call for one. </p>
<p>But the Dutch government now plans to overturn this right in the future. On February 22, a majority in the Tweede Kamer, the lower house of the Dutch parliament, <a href="https://nltimes.nl/2018/02/23/dutch-parliament-agrees-abolish-referendum">voted to scrap the referendum law</a>. It’s unlikely that the vote will be undone by the Senate when it comes to vote on the issue.</p>
<p>The March plebiscite on surveillance powers, which is happening at the same time as local council elections, might well be the country’s last advisory referendum.</p>
<h2>Embarrassing results</h2>
<p>The Advisory Referendum Law was the brainchild of three MPs from the social liberal party, Democraten 66 (D66) – a party founded in the free-spirited and idealistic 1960s – the Socialists and the Green Party. The law was supported by these parties and rightist populist Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party (PVV). It was opposed by the centre-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) – the party of current prime minister Mark Rutte – and the two small Christian Democrat parties, the CDA and ChristenUnie.</p>
<p>Its aim was to hold politicians to account. While the result is non-binding, it is <a href="https://www.meerdemocratie.nl/dutch-consultative-referendum-law-overview">only quorate</a> if more than 30% of voters turn out – in which case it’s difficult for Dutch politicians to ignore the result. </p>
<p>A new Dutch coalition government comprised of the VVD, CDA and ChristenUnie and the D66, took office in 2017. Rutte is a critic of referendums, and the <a href="http://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/netherlands-draft-law-to-end-advisory-referendum-law/">move to abolish</a> the right to demand referendums happened at his instigation. But it’s remarkable, given the D66’s role in passing the law in the first place. </p>
<p>The reason for the turnaround is that Dutch voters have not behaved as expected. Politicians didn’t expect voters to actually challenge controversial legislation – but that’s exactly what happened, most <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-dutch-referendum-on-eu-ukraine-treaty-doesnt-signal-a-step-towards-nexit-57460">notably in a 2016 referendum</a> called to block the European Union’s Association Treaty with Ukraine.</p>
<p>As treaties with foreign countries must be unanimously approved by the EU states, the Dutch parliament could block the treaty. A concerted effort, <a href="https://nos.nl/artikel/2082091-amerikaanse-miljardair-sponsort-ja-campagne-oekraine-referendum.html">sponsored</a> by the Hungarian-American billionaire George Soros, and spearheaded by Rutte, campaigned for ratification. Despite this, in April 2016, 61% of the Dutch electors voted to block the European Union’s Association Treaty with the Ukraine on a 32% turnout.</p>
<p>The outcome did not cause a revolution, nor did it fundamentally alter the relationship between the EU and the Ukraine. But it forced the Dutch government – and the EU as a whole – to find a compromise position, and to justify this to their voters.</p>
<h2>Not how to strengthen democracy</h2>
<p>“The referendum”, as Albert Dicey, a prominent legal theorist, once <a href="http://files.libertyfund.org/files/1714/0125_Bk.pdf">observed</a>, is “the people’s veto”. And in many ways, the Dutch referendum in 2016 was a clear example of this in practice.</p>
<p>But politicians do not like to be embarrassed. Now, rather than having to explain themselves to the voters, Dutch politicians want to abolish the right to demand referendums. </p>
<p>Apart from Ireland in 1928, no democratic country has taken away the right to demand referendums. Back then, the opposition party, Fianna Fail, had collected signatures to overturn the requirement that members of the Dáil swear allegiance to the British Monarch. The then Irish prime minister, William Thomas Cosgrave, responded not by holding a referendum, but by <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-349-24796-7_6">abolishing the provision</a> before a plebiscite could take place. </p>
<p>The Dutch government’s argument <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/06166110-1af0-11e8-aaca-4574d7dabfb6">seems to be</a> that referendums “undermine democracy”. But this is – to use a British expression – “double Dutch”: gibberish or gobbledygook.</p>
<p>Democracies are not strengthened by doing away with referendums. If you take away responsibility from people they become irresponsible; but if you give responsibility to people they become responsible. That’s why, in 2012, voters in California <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_30,_Sales_and_Income_Tax_Increase_(2012)">voted for tax increases</a>. They were aware that the public sector required more money to deliver the level of services required in the state. </p>
<p>The referendum also provides a safety valve for letting out political steam. Those unhappy with specific policies can use the referendum to demand specific changes. In the absence of advisory referendums in the future, disgruntled Dutch voters might resort to protest voting and they could turn to protest parties to show dissatisfaction. This could strengthen Wilders’ far right PVV party. </p>
<p>Elsewhere in the world, referendums are on the increase. In some cases, the referendum has been used to resolve internal political conflicts. David Cameron’s ill-fated Brexit referendum was held to keep his party together. But in most cases, the referendums are held either because they are demanded by the people – as in Switzerland, half of the US states and Italy – or because the constitution requires that fundamental issues are supported by the mass of the electorate, which is the case in Australia, Ireland and Denmark. And in most cases, the ruling government has lost when it has tried to steamroll fundamental changes.</p>
<p>There’s no reason to change this law. Referendums – as a general rule – have <a href="https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/article/rise-referendums-demystifying-direct-democracy">been a people’s shield</a>, not the governors’ sword. Sadly, this shield will be taken away from the Dutch voters.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92705/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matt Qvortrup has received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council. He was a special advisor to the Constitutional Affairs and Public Administration Committee in the House of Commons on the European Union Referendum Act 2015. </span></em></p>The abolition of citizen referendums in the Netherlands will do little to remedy the distrust in the political system – and could strengthen Geert Wilders’ far-right party.Matt Qvortrup, Chair of Applied Political Science, Coventry UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/747102017-03-16T13:33:08Z2017-03-16T13:33:08ZDutch election: why Geert Wilders failed to destroy the mainstream government<p>Mark Rutte, the Dutch prime minister, has comfortably seen off right-wing populist Geert Wilders in an <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/15/pm-mark-rutte-set-to-beat-geert-wilders-in-dutch-election">election</a> that pitted the establishment against populists. </p>
<p>Rutte’s centre-right VVD has lost eight parliamentary seats, but, with 33 seats, remains the largest party in a <a href="https://theconversation.com/fragmented-field-keeps-voters-guessing-as-dutch-election-approaches-73725">highly fragmented parliament</a>. No fewer than 13 political parties will be represented in parliament, and Rutte must seek to form a coalition government from among them.</p>
<p>Having won five extra seats, Wilders’ anti-Islam and anti-EU party, <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-history-of-dutch-populism-from-the-murder-of-pim-fortuyn-to-the-rise-of-geert-wilders-74483">the PVV</a>, is expected to become the second largest party with 20 seats. But given that other parties won’t work with Wilders, it is unlikely to find a place in the coalition. </p>
<p>The result has been welcomed by mainstream politicians across Europe and is seen as a sign that the appeal of populist, anti-immigrant and nationalist politics can be checked.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, there have been some dramatic changes in the Dutch political landscape. In particular, the Labour party, the PvdA, has suffered a massive loss of support. As the junior partner in the incumbent government, the PvdA lost 29 seats. Instead of 38 representatives in parliament, it will now have only nine.</p>
<p>The Green party, on the other hand, has gained 10 seats, and now has 14 representatives. The Christian Democratic CDA and progressive D66 are likely to have won six and seven extra seats respectively and to each end up with 19 seats.</p>
<h2>What happened to Wilders?</h2>
<p>The PVV made “de-Islamisation” the core element of its political platform. Echoing and inspiring politicians such as Donald Trump, Nigel Farage and Marie Le Pen, Wilders called for control over national borders to reduce the flow of immigrants and refugees – particularly from Muslim countries. His “Netherlands first” agenda would have taken the country out of the EU. Eurosceptic parties, the PVV and the new FvD, will have about 22 seats, which is less than the 24 they gained in 2010, or the 26 seats Pim Fortuyn, another populist politician, won in 2002. The fairly stable numbers, however, also show steady support for far-right policies.</p>
<p>Wilders was actually largely absent from the campaign trail ahead of the vote. Following a breach in his security, he initially <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/23/geert-wilders-suspends-election-campaign-over-alleged-security-leak">withdrew from campaigning</a>. Later, he decided to only attend a select number of events. In light of a constant stream of threats against him, the reaction may have been understandable. However, if the object had been to make Islamist threats to his – and by implication, everybody’s – security a main topic in the campaign, then there is little to suggest that it had any effect. Opinion polls held throughout the campaign showed a <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/geert-wilders-dutch-election-far-right-2017-poll-latest-second-place-netherlands-a7605106.html">decline in support</a> for the PVV.</p>
<h2>Economics trumps hate</h2>
<p>Support for the incumbent coalition government of the VVD and the PvdA had declined early. The VVD succeeded in making up ground but the PvdA never recovered. Rutte had some success in portraying himself as a competent leader of conservative politics. The leader of the PvdA, and vice prime minister, Lodewijk Asscher had a much harder time defending the record of the government, and in particular the specific contributions of the labour party. </p>
<p>The coalition government had a pretty good record to defend. The Dutch economy has rebounded from the 2009 financial crisis and is now among the fastest growing of the OECD countries. Unemployment is low and the government actually recorded a budget surplus in the last quarters before the election. And while the economy didn’t seem to play an important role in an election campaign overshadowed by issues of immigration and national identity, the actual outcome suggests otherwise. </p>
<p>A plausible interpretation is that Dutch voters who actually experienced the benefits of the economic recovery voted for political stability by continuing to vote for the VVD. Any loss of VVD votes was mainly due to a swing towards the Christian Democratic CDA, and reflects a preference for a centre-right (VVD-CDA) coalition rather than the VVD-PvdA coalition.</p>
<p>The calculus for the traditional left was quite different. The impact of the economic recovery has been much less clear to them. Austerity has seen a decline in public sector employment and less money available for social care. Nearly everybody recognises that the economy is doing well, but not everybody sees that they, or people like them, are benefiting.</p>
<p>Seen in this way, the Dutch election has some similarities with the US presidential election and the UK Brexit vote. Economic growth, or the prospect of economic decline, only matters electorally when voters expect actually to be affected by general trends.</p>
<h2>Who governs?</h2>
<p>Dutch politics inevitably now has to face the need to form a coalition government. The negotiations between the possible coalition parties tend to be highly detailed and can easily take a couple of months. As is customary, the largest party will take the lead and, if it succeeds in forming a coalition government, will provide the prime minister. Rutte says he wants to avoid a coalition with the PVV, making a coalition with the CDA and D66 nearly inevitable. This coalition would be able to count on the support of 71 members of parliament, five short of the 76 needed to have a majority. </p>
<p>The centrist CU (Christian Union) could provide the five further seats, and a VVD-CDA-D66-CU coalition looks indeed the most likely outcome. Alternatively, the Green Party with 14 seats could join the coalition, but it will be more difficult to bridge the programmatic differences between the Green Party and the VVD/CDA. It is even possible that the PvdA could join the coalition, but in light of its massive electoral defeat this seems highly unlikely. </p>
<p>Regardless, the prospect of another populist politician dominating European politics appears to have abated … at least for now.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74710/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Han Dorussen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Prime Minister Mark Rutte saw off the populists, but his smaller coalition partner has been hammered.Han Dorussen, Professor, Department of Government, University of EssexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/747092017-03-16T11:06:51Z2017-03-16T11:06:51ZRutte victorious, Wilders sidelined, centre-left obliterated: what the Dutch election means for Europe<p>Voters in the Netherlands have handed current Prime Minister Mark Rutte a <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39285803?intlink_from_url=http://www.bbc.com/news/topics/4e793c8f-8927-4e00-a7e5-3bed964303d3/dutch-general-election-2017&link_location=live-reporting-story">resounding victory</a> over far-right, anti-EU firebrand Geert Wilders in national elections. Rutte’s centre-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) is projected to win <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/16/europe/netherlands-dutch-results/index.html">33 of 150 seats in the Dutch parliament</a>, while Wilders’s Freedom Party (PVV) is set to capture 20, placing him in distant second place.</p>
<p>Rutte’s victory was met with immediate relief from national capitals across Europe. French President François Hollande called it “a clear victory against extremism.” German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s chief of staff, Peter Altmaier, congratulated the Netherlands on the “<a href="https://twitter.com/peteraltmaier/status/842107611734544384">great result</a>”.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"842260693571235843"}"></div></p>
<p>Elections in the Netherlands – a stable, prosperous country of nearly 17 million – do not generally receive so much international attention or scrutiny. But many suggested that yesterday’s election would <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/15/europe/netherlands-election-populism-rutte-wilders/">serve as a bellwether</a> for the electoral strength of far right political movements across Europe. <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/15/europe/netherlands-dutch-elections/">Voter turnout</a>, at 81%, was the highest in the Netherlands in 30 years.</p>
<p>The Dutch vote was the first of three important national elections in Europe this year. In France, a two-round presidential election is set for April 23 and May 7. German national elections are scheduled for September 24. The French and German votes in particular will be pivotal for the future of the European Union. </p>
<p>A victory in France by the National Front’s Marine Le Pen, who for years has campaigned aggressively against the EU, would immediately <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/21/eu-tax-chief-admits-le-pen-winning-would-be-the-end-of-the-european-project.html">throw the very future of the bloc</a> into question.</p>
<h2>Wilders on the sidelines</h2>
<p>Outside the Netherlands, the main storyline of the Dutch election was Geert Wilders, and whether he would be able to follow last year’s two biggest populist, anti-establishment electoral triumphs: the Brexit vote in June and the election of Donald Trump in November.</p>
<p>For years Wilders has been one of the most polarising political figures in Europe. He has made a number of inflammatory statements and accusations about Islam and Muslim immigration. He wants to <a href="http://www.politico.eu/article/far-right-dutch-politician-backs-mosques-koran-ban-islamic-schools/">ban the Qu’ran, close mosques</a>, and put an end to Muslim immigration into the Netherlands. He has also <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/07/dutch-election-and-geert-wilder-future-of-european-union.html">called for a referendum</a> on whether the Netherlands should remain in the EU.</p>
<p>For his ubiquitous social media presence, verbal insults (“<a href="https://twitter.com/geertwilderspvv/status/835918270742028290?lang=en">leftist elite losers</a>” and “<a href="https://twitter.com/geertwilderspvv/status/832950583430508544">Moroccan scum</a>”), and signature blond mane, he has been called the <a href="http://www.vox.com/world/2017/3/14/14921614/geert-wilders-islamophobia-islam-netherlands-populism-europe">Dutch Donald Trump</a>.</p>
<p>Since forming his own party in 2006, Wilders has attracted millions of followers who also embrace his anti-Islam, anti-EU message. In December 2016 he was <a href="https://theconversation.com/guilty-verdict-but-an-excellent-day-for-dutch-far-right-leader-geert-wilders-nonetheless-70227">convicted</a> in a Dutch court for inciting “discrimination and hatred” against an ethnic group. He receives regular death threats and lives under <a href="http://www.politico.eu/article/geert-wilders-protected-by-special-military-police-unit/">constant police protection</a>.</p>
<p>It was unlikely that Wilders would have become Prime Minister even if he had come out on top yesterday. The other main parties, including Rutte’s VVD, declared months ago that they <a href="http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2017/01/vvd-leader-mark-rutte-says-zero-chance-of-coalition-with-geert-wilders/">would not enter into a coalition government</a> with him.</p>
<p>Wilders will thus remain on the sidelines, which could suit him even more than being Prime Minister. As head of government, he would have had to build coalitions and reach compromises with the other parties, and get into the day-to-day minutiae of actually governing.</p>
<h2>The business of forming government</h2>
<p>Instead, Rutte will again seek to form a new coalition government, which could turn out to be a long, protracted process (the record for forming a governing coalition in the Netherlands is from 1977, when it took <a href="https://qz.com/933007/it-could-be-months-before-we-actually-know-who-won-the-dutch-election/">208 days</a>). Given how splintered yesterday’s vote was, it will take three or even four parties to form a coalition.</p>
<p>A few broader takeaways are possible. First, Rutte’s victory is surely a welcome sign to establishment politicians across Europe that seek to stem the tide of populist, anti-EU parties. </p>
<p>Wilders represents the kind of <a href="https://theconversation.com/europes-far-right-parties-got-a-boost-from-trump-but-will-they-govern-72319">anti-establishment movement</a> that has sprung up over Europe in recent years that has capitalised on concerns over immigration, crime, and anti-EU sentiments. But the French Presidential election will be the real test of populism’s appeal and strength in Europe. France is the <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-09/draghi-savors-synchronized-summer-for-euro-area-s-four-economies">second-biggest economy</a> in the eurozone and, with Germany, the political heart of the EU.</p>
<p>While Wilders did not manage to come out on top, he did succeed in <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-dutch-immigrant-voters-fight-back-at-the-ballot-box-74500">pushing the public debate to the right</a>. The rhetoric about immigration and the EU hardened. With intense focus on immigration and the ability and even the willingness of immigrant communities to integrate into Dutch society, it was an unusually divisive campaign for the Netherlands.</p>
<p>Issues that were not even discussed a few years ago — such as leaving the eurozone or slowing the flow of refugees into the country — were the centre of debate.</p>
<h2>The end of the centre-left</h2>
<p>The election showed the <a href="https://theconversation.com/whatever-the-election-result-the-dutch-public-is-dangerously-polarised-74467">growing fragmentation</a> of Dutch politics, which is also a trend across Europe. There has been a shift away from traditional, establishment parties of the centre-right and centre-left. </p>
<p>There were a record <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/03/15/with-28-parties-running-dutch-voters-have-to-use-these-literally-enormous-ballots/">28 parties</a> on the Dutch ballot yesterday, and six of them will have ten or more seats in the new parliament. While Rutte’s party lost eight seats, the centre-left imploded. The Labour Party will be <a href="https://euobserver.com/elections/137258">left with nine seats</a>, a loss of 29 from the current parliament.</p>
<p>In France, the presidential runoff in May <a href="https://theconversation.com/2017-could-be-a-turning-point-for-european-integration-but-not-in-the-way-you-think-72524">may not even feature</a> candidates from the two traditional centre-right and centre-left parties. In Italy, the rise of the Five Star Movement and the Northern League has <a href="https://theconversation.com/matteo-renzi-just-killed-off-italys-centre-left-73492">cut into support</a> for mainstream parties.</p>
<p>Even in Germany, the far-right has made electoral gains. The Alternative for Germany (AfD) party is now represented in <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37403542">ten of Germany’s 16 states</a>. Though its support has been declining since the start of the year, it is still expected to win enough votes to enter the Bundestag in September.</p>
<p>If the rise of far-right, anti-EU parties does pose an existential threat for the EU, the union survived its first test yesterday. Further tests will be sure to come, but EU leaders can breathe a sigh of relief, for now.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74709/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Maher does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>EU leaders will breathe a sigh of relief after the centre-right saw off the populist threat.Richard Maher, Research Fellow, Global Governance Programme, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University InstituteLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/746682017-03-16T02:43:32Z2017-03-16T02:43:32ZPopulist Wilders may have come up short, but Dutch intolerance is still real<p>The Dutch elections on March 15 have received a lot of attention in the international media. </p>
<p>The reason for the attention is clear: A Trump lookalike populist, Geert Wilders, was rumored to win big as part of a Western populist movement that some call the “Patriotic Spring.” </p>
<p>His rise has the liberal West confused and concerned, because if the land of gay marriage and coffee shops falls, then where is their hope for Western liberalism?</p>
<p>But, as results are coming in, two things are becoming clear: Election turnout was <a href="http://www.politico.eu/article/dutch-pm-rutte-comes-first-in-election-but-loses-seats-exit-poll/">high</a> and Wilders’ support <a href="http://www.dw.com/en/dutch-pm-ruttes-vvd-emerges-top-in-first-exit-poll/a-37937959">relatively low</a>. Projections show Wilders’ party winning 19 seats compared to 31 seats for the Dutch-right liberal conservatives of Prime Minister Mark Rutte. What does all this tell us about the populist movement? Is our bedrock of tolerance safe again?</p>
<p>To understand what happened in these Dutch elections, we need to look beyond Wilders and his place in Western populism to the myth of Dutch tolerance.</p>
<p>Students in my race and ethnicity courses at the University of Michigan have been engaged in this very task as they examine current and historic diversity in the Netherlands. When they read University of Amsterdam sociologist <a href="http://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9780230293984">Jan Willem Duyvendak</a> or Free University of Amsterdam Holocaust historian <a href="https://academic.oup.com/hgs/article-abstract/19/3/535/645489/Return-Holocaust-Survivors-and-Dutch-Antisemitism">Dienke Hondius</a>, a more complicated picture of Dutch tolerance emerges. </p>
<p>Wilders doesn’t represent a sudden movement of the Netherlands away from tolerance. Dutch tolerance does not really exist in the way the stereotype dictates. Seventy years ago, the country saw a larger percentage of its Jewish population deported and killed than any other Western European nation. This fact does not lend itself to simple explanations but has at least in part been attributed to the lack of protection of Jews by non-Jews and to Dutch collaboration with the <a href="http://ehq.sagepub.com/content/19/3/333.citation">Nazi occupation</a>. </p>
<p>Looking at modern times, CUNY political scientist <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/296822981_Assimilating_immigrants_in_Amsterdam_A_perspective_from_New_York">John Mollenkopf</a> reports poorer immigrant integration outcomes, such as employment rates and job retention, in Amsterdam than in New York City, and Duyvendak finds explanations for these outcomes in <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3362.3767">white majority-culture dominance</a>.</p>
<h2>A pretty story</h2>
<p>A few weeks after the 2016 U.S. elections, elderly Dutch statesman Jan Terlouw made <a href="http://dewerelddraaitdoor.vara.nl/media/367395">a plea to the Dutch nation</a>. Speaking as the Jimmy Carter-like voice of reason of the political establishment, he asked the nation to go back to a time where Dutch people trusted each other, a time where people could enter the homes of other Dutchmen freely and without suspicion. It was a “Make the Netherlands Great Again” message of sorts, but coming from the Dutch center-left. </p>
<p>I grew up in the Netherlands of Jan Terlouw. The country gave me an idyllic childhood, with soccer and hopscotch in the streets, but I never stepped freely into the homes of Indonesians who lived, grouped together, on the next street. My white Dutch friends still know little to nothing about the relationship between <a href="https://www.dukeupress.edu/white-innocence">race and our colonial history</a>, or about the people of color who came to live in the Netherlands through that history. Some Americans may be surprised to learn that the Netherlands has a more than 20 percent nonmajority ethnic Dutch population, 10 percent of which are Indonesians, Surinamese and Dutch Caribbeans from former or current colonies, as well as Turks and Moroccans who (or whose family) originally came as part of guest worker programs.</p>
<p>Terlouw’s story is a beautiful story, then, but it isn’t true, and neither is the story that the Dutch have suddenly become intolerant as part of global Western populism. In reality, the Dutch good old days were good old days because racial minorities were sidelined and did not complain, for example, about the slaves depicted on the <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/race-colonialism-and-the-netherlands-golden-coach">golden coach</a> that carries the Dutch king to the annual “Throne Address,” or the state of union.</p>
<h2>Wilders isn’t unique</h2>
<p>Now Dutch intolerance in the person of Wilders is on display around the world, and it is not limited to his party. </p>
<p>Of the 28 parties on the Dutch ballot this year, five have anti-Islam or anti-immigrant platforms, some more openly so than others. The Party for Entrepreneurs, for example, calls for a “mosque watch.” Another one of these five parties – the Forum for Democracy party, which has a restrictive immigration and EU-cautious platform – appears to have <a href="http://www.politico.eu/article/dutch-pm-rutte-comes-first-in-election-but-loses-seats-exit-poll/">won two seats</a>.</p>
<p>Dutch nationalism does not just live on the right. All the big parties that are contenders to enter a coalition government after this election – from all the way left to all the way right – reference “Dutchness” in one way or another in their party platforms, as a presumed understanding of what it means to be Dutch, or in the form of shared national values and a “be like us” message to immigrants. Dutch nationalism is ubiquitous.</p>
<p>But one important aspect of today’s elections is overshadowed by the Wilders discussion. The Dutch citizens who voted Wednesday had the choice of voting for a party called “DENK,” with mixed Dutch-Turkish, or Dutch-minority, values that <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/world/europe/dutch-denk-party.html">some critics</a> call the Dutch <a href="http://www.elsevier.nl/opinie/opinie/2016/04/298185-298185/">Erdogan satellite party</a>.</p>
<p>Voters could also support “Artikel 1,” a party founded by minority rights activist Sylvana Simons nine weeks ago – and just four months after the country saw its racist holiday character of Zwarte Piet (the blackfaced helper of Saint Nicholas) phased out on national television amid white nationalist screams and quieter criticisms about the end of Dutch culture and tradition. </p>
<p>Artikel 1, named for the equality clause in the Dutch constitution, has the slogan “All Different But Yet The Same” and calls for equal rights for all Dutch people, men, women, gay, straight and, importantly, black, white, native and immigrant. This election was the first time we saw minority parties such as DENK and Artikel 1 with programs advocating for education about Dutch migration history, the teaching of languages beyond the traditional European ones, a registry for racist hate crimes and a national holiday to celebrate the emancipation of Dutch slaves. Remember: The kingdom of the Netherlands is still a colonial power over the nation states of Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten, and the country of the Netherlands over the three Caribbean islands of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba.</p>
<p>As a new Dutch government is formed in the weeks to come, we could brush the minority parties off as a reaction to Wilders’ populism and see his defeat as a return of Dutch tolerance, but we would be wiser to see these elections as the beginning of a sea change in a country that is slowly changing to meet its tolerant mythology.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74668/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Annemarie Toebosch is a member of the Dutch political party Artikel 1. </span></em></p>The famous anti-immigrant crusader fizzled at the polls, but the Netherlands still has a legacy of intolerance to turn around.Annemarie Toebosch, Director of Dutch and Flemish Studies, University of MichiganLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/338852014-11-06T19:23:17Z2014-11-06T19:23:17ZGrattan on Friday: Game of cat-and-bear as Abbott pursues Putin<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/63865/original/92s3y7sx-1415274264.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Prime Minister of The Netherlands Mark Rutte reacts as he listens to Australian Prime Minster Tony Abbott, in Canberra.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP Image/Reuters POOL, David Gray</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Russians have started coming. On Thursday, an aircraft with about 80-90 Russians arrived in preparation for the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Brisbane. There will be four more official planes, including President Vladimir Putin’s, a back-up, and one for cargo.</p>
<p>As Team Russia assembles, Tony Abbott and Putin are playing cat-and-bear. Alexander Odoevskiy, second secretary at the Russian embassy, says that last week Australia put a formal request to Moscow for the Prime Minister to have a bilateral with the President at APEC in Beijing next week. Odoevskiy does not know the answer.</p>
<p>Abbott originally <a href="https://theconversation.com/abbott-vows-to-shirt-front-putin-as-russian-diplomat-recalls-better-times-32889">threatened to “shirt-front”</a> Putin in Brisbane, which never seemed a good idea. More sensibly, he is now aiming to bring forward the conversation about the MH17 investigation.</p>
<p>As Abbott <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/foreign-affairs/vladimir-putin-cant-duck-tony-abbotts-mh17-message/story-fn59nm2j-1227114014390">said to The Australian</a> this week: “What I won’t be doing is disrupting the sessions of the G20 with a private argument between Australia and Russia.”</p>
<p>After his Thursday talks with visiting Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, focusing on MH17, Abbott told a joint news conference: “One way or another, I will take the chance to speak to the Russian President sometime over the next week or so. I’ll be in Beijing with him at the APEC conference, then of course we’re expecting him at the G20 conference in Brisbane.</p>
<p>"What I’ll be saying to him is that Australia expects full Russian co-operation with the [MH17]investigation. We don’t want the investigation ridiculed, we don’t want the investigation compromised or sabotaged…</p>
<p>"Russia as a member of the international community owes it to the world, owes it to humanity, to ensure that justice is done and wherever possible the perpetrators of this crime are brought to justice.”</p>
<p>Rutte has already delivered that message face-to-face to Putin, as has Foreign Minister Julie Bishop. Abbott will get the same answer as Putin gave to Bishop: that MH17 was downed over Ukraine, but he’ll use what influence he has.</p>
<p>But the PM wants to personally have the conversation, not least for domestic political reasons, including that he’s built up expectations of what he’ll say. Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has also put Abbott under pressure with his hard line on Putin.</p>
<p>International stages, abroad and at home, will dominate the Prime Minister’s attention over the next couple of weeks. He’s won marks earlier in this area, but every performance poses new tests, of which one is being seen to deliver a tough message to Putin without having the G20 meeting overshadowed.</p>
<p>Abbott leaves on Sunday for APEC, which will be followed by the East Asia summit in Myanmar, before he returns to host the G20 on the weekend of November 15-16. </p>
<p>In Beijing next week, Chinese President Xi Jinping is set to formally launch China’s new regional bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, on which Australia has been caught awkwardly between the United States and China.</p>
<p>Ministers were split on whether Australia should join, with Treasurer Joe Hockey and Trade Minister Andrew Robb in favour and Foreign Minister Julie Bishop opposing – and carrying the day.</p>
<p>The deadline for the initial sign-up has passed. For the time being Australia is staying out. There is concern over governance issues but also the United States, which strongly lobbied Australia, is worried the bank will be used to extend China’s strategic influence in the region.</p>
<p>Abbott, with an eye to being in Beijing, is stressing there is no final decision against joining the bank - Australia wants further discussions about governance and transparency. He said this week: “We haven’t decided not to join. We would like to join but we want to join a multilateral institution, but not one that is basically owned and operated by China.”</p>
<p>Those in official circles who want Australia to join believe that’s Abbott’s inclination too.</p>
<p>The China bank fracas has seen detailed leaking from both sides about the internal row. The failure to sign up at the first stage represented another defeat for Hockey.</p>
<p>Now that the deadline has gone, the bank issue becomes less urgent. What is urgent over the next few days is landing the Australia-China free trade agreement.</p>
<p>Robb is in Beijing working on finalising the deal, where some thorny matters about agriculture needed to be ironed out.</p>
<p>Xi addresses federal parliament on November 17, straight after the G20. The agreement must be tied up before then. Abbott is confident. The details of the deal will be scrutinised by experts later to see what compromises were made in the quest to deliver on time.</p>
<p>As Abbott prepares to meet other leaders at both APEC and the G20, the government has finally moved this week to provide a more comprehensive response on Ebola.</p>
<p>Its reluctance had been obvious. The path it has taken, using a private medical provider, Aspen Medical, to run a British-constructed hospital in Sierra Leone, fitted its desire to be as hands-off as possible and – perhaps – its general philosophic preference to “go private” in health areas.</p>
<p>Cabinet’s national security committee has done the heavy lifting on the Ebola issue - holding multiple discussions – rather than the full cabinet. That is despite Abbott saying: “This is a public health emergency. It’s not a security emergency. It’s certainly not an economic emergency.”</p>
<p>The NSC’s brief has become very wide since national security issues came to the fore. Soon, the wits around the government will be comparing it with Kevin Rudd’s gang of four.</p>
<p>Ebola, including its potential economic impact (some experts are considerably more pessimistic than Abbott), is expected to be canvassed at the G20, though not as an agenda item.</p>
<p>After having been pressed hard by the US and Britain to put resources on the ground, Abbott had to make a credible commitment before he met Barack Obama and David Cameron. Not that they would have shirt-fronted him or anything. </p>
<p><strong>Listen to the latest Politics with Michelle Grattan podcast, with Transparency International’s Maggie Murphy, <a href="http://michellegrattan.podbean.com/e/maggie-murphy/">here</a>.</strong></p>
<iframe src="https://www.podbean.com/media/player/audio/postId/5359487/url/http%253A%252F%252Fmichellegrattan.podbean.com%252Fe%252Fmaggie-murphy%252F/initByJs/1/auto/1" width="100%" height="100" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/33885/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Russians have started coming. On Thursday, an aircraft with about 80-90 Russians arrived in preparation for the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Brisbane. There will be four more official planes, including President…Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.