Spoilt for Choice: Dutch Party Politics and the Polder Model
Image courtesy of Mirlan Talip via Unsplash ©2019, some rights reserved.
For weeks, Dutch media has been dominated by two topics: the continued lockdown and the upcoming national elections, to be held on the 17th of March. With an astonishing 37 political parties to choose from, the Dutch voter is spoilt for choice. Yet with so many options, it is perhaps unsurprising that voters can feel overwhelmed or indecisive – an estimated 35 out of the 150 seats in the Second Chamber are set to be determined by the floating voter, according to Jos Heymans. So, what are the realities of Dutch party politics? Is the multiparty system a blessing – or a curse?
At the heart of Dutch politics is the so-called polder model. The term originates in the necessary cooperation between the upper and lower classes in protecting the farmland from flooding. This translated into modern politics in the late 20thcentury with the increasing importance of open discussion and compromise between disparate groups, both between trade unions and the government and amongst the various parliamentary factions themselves. This openness to debate was a crucial component of a country divided into various strands of theological beliefs who, while attending separate schools, churches and social spheres, could not avoid interacting in the realm of politics.
Nowadays, the polder model is most evident in the necessity of forming coalitions following the national elections. According to this year’s polls, under a third of the country’s votes will go to the party currently in the lead, The People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD). To obtain a parliamentary majority, the winning party must create an alliance with multiple other parties, preferably ones whose policies overlap with their own. This can be an incredibly time-consuming process – in 2017 it took the parties over 200 days to come to an agreement. This, then, is one of the crucial drawbacks of the system, with the lengthy negotiation period preventing efficient decision-making on urgent matters in the meantime.
Moreover, tensions between the first and second largest party can mean that coalitions have to be sought elsewhere; often, the leading party prefers to collude with two or three smaller parties rather than uniting with its main rival. This may well be the case again this year, as the possibility of forming an alliance with the second largest party, the far-right Party for Freedom (PVV), has already been dismissed by the VVD. Sometimes, however, this unwillingness to unite can result in the coalition having a parliamentary minority, making it difficult for them to pass new laws. In this sense, the multiparty system can hinder the successful functioning of the cabinet, which struggles to implement decisions without the backing of a parliamentary majority. Even when the coalition does succeed in obtaining support from the Second Chamber, its laws can fail to secure the necessary approval of the First Chamber, or senate, where the distribution of seats is often different. For instance, the 2019 elections saw a tied first-place for the far-right Forum for Democracy, a party which is not predicted to perform favourably next week after a scandal last year saw the desertion of most of Thierry Baudet’s party. Sometimes, then, the sheer number of parties means that the cabinet’s hands are tied, making it difficult for the parliament to implement change.
However, the leading party’s lack of power has its advantages too, leading to long-term stability and continuity over successive parliaments. In comparison to two-party systems like the US, where each president has the power to reverse the policies of his predecessor and implement far-reaching changes in the country’s governance, the Dutch system allows for more cohesion over the course of successive parliaments.
The Dutch system of proportional representation has its advantages for the voters, too. Instead of voting for a representative of each district, who must obtain a majority in their area to obtain a seat in parliament, everyone in the Netherlands chooses from the same list of candidates. Arguably, this makes the final parliament a more accurate reflection of the country as a whole than the majority system, where a party could have the largest number of votes but fail to obtain an outright majority in any one district. It also means that every vote counts; because it is unnecessary for any party to obtain a majority, voters don’t have to worry that their vote will be thrown away if they select a smaller, less mainstream party.
It could be argued, then, that the multiparty system allows for a greater degree of diversity in parliament than would otherwise have been possible. This effect is exacerbated by the fact that Dutch voters can select their preferred candidate from the party of their choice. The candidates for each party are ranked in order on the ballot paper – the higher a candidate appears on the list, the more likely they are to be allocated one of the party’s seats following the election results. The party leader tends to be the obvious and easiest choice, and with an overwhelming 1579 candidates to choose from, voters could be forgiven for seeking out a familiar face in the crowd. But recent years have seen initiatives to use the system to the advantage of minority groups, by voting for those nearer the bottom and thus improving their chances of rising in the ranks and being accorded a seat after all. This could result in a greater representation of women and young people in parliament in future.
On the one hand, then, the Dutch multiparty system and polder model can seem confusing, time-consuming and inefficient, making it almost impossible for decisions to pass through parliament without lengthy and inconclusive negotiations. But, in many ways, these practical inconveniences are compensated for by the fairer, more representative distribution of power. If it means that the voices of women, young people and other minority groups are heard, and that no single power can enforce policies without the approval of both coalition and opposition, the benefits of the polder model are well worth the wait.
