mayor
Heart & Mind
Anandus explanation on the 'bike program' is better btw 
Ask a Dutchman!
- Thread starter Agent327
- Start date
I would say that the Dutch legacy in South Africa, even after being taken over by the Brits, is quite prolonged. The conquest of Indonesia, by contrast, wasn´t completed until the end of the 19th century, and focused originally primarily on the Moluccas, where most Christians now reside.
And then there´s the West Indies, where the 3 isles of Aruba, Curacao and Bonaire are still part of ´the empire´. Relations with Surinam have actually only become troubled after its independence in 1975.
That said, there are Surinam and Moluccan minorities in the Netherlands today, and I think its´s fair to say that relations with people from Surinam and Indonesia have generally been better than official relations might suggest.
Actually, most Dutch public servants and policemen were very ´helpful´ in rounding up Jews; most officials didn´t resign, but carried out their work for the authorities as before the occupation... Resistance groups were small and few, and the worker strike of February 1941 against treatment of the Jews didn´t have any lasting effect.
Indeed. Official records weren´t destroyed or even hidden, but simply handed over to the German authorities.
As per PM Mark Rutte, the offical stance of the Dutch government prior to the current proposals was actually even sterner than the German´s - which, according to newspaper reports, caused some dismay with PM Merkel.
mayor
Heart & Mind
that's what I meant
Recently Israeli PM Netanyahu made an official visit to the Netherlands. During a TV interview, when confronted with a question regarding Israel´s recognition of the 1967 peace treaties, he claimed that Israeli settlements amount to no more than 1.3 % of the Westbank. NRC Handelsblad, a Dutch newspaper, checked this claim: depending on counting method, Israeli settlements amount indeed to a mere 1-1.5 % of Westbank territory. However, this percentage is dwarfed by the territory that is actually available to Palestinians on the Westbank: about 33 % of its territory is considered vital for Israeli transportation (all the roads connecting the various settlements), and consequently does not fall under the Palestinian Authority. So while Netanyahu´s claim is largely truthful, it also distorts the reality of the situation in a gross manner.
mayor
Heart & Mind
I fully support the distribution of this information but why do you post it here? This is not the first thread people will read for this subject, wouldn't a different thread be better or maybe creating a new thread for this? (just asking )
)Well, basically I consider it a bit of ´Dutch´ news. I don´t want to start a whole thread on it. 
In other news, our annual ´unexpected snow´ ritual started last weekend, meaning almost 1,000 km of traffic jams cluttered the roads during the initial snowfall last weekend plus, ofcourse (?), the railroad service went into ´winter service´ (an euphemism for less service, trains not running, delays, and what have you). So questions have been asked in parliament, the responsible minister addressed the Dutch Railroads, and as usual nothing will change until next year´s ´unexpected snow´ arrives. By contrast no disrupted railroad service is ever reported from our German neighbour, which usually gets quite a lot more snow that we do...
In other news, our annual ´unexpected snow´ ritual started last weekend, meaning almost 1,000 km of traffic jams cluttered the roads during the initial snowfall last weekend plus, ofcourse (?), the railroad service went into ´winter service´ (an euphemism for less service, trains not running, delays, and what have you). So questions have been asked in parliament, the responsible minister addressed the Dutch Railroads, and as usual nothing will change until next year´s ´unexpected snow´ arrives. By contrast no disrupted railroad service is ever reported from our German neighbour, which usually gets quite a lot more snow that we do...
mayor
Heart & Mind
ahaWell, basically I consider it a bit of ´Dutch´ news. I don´t want to start a whole thread on it.
And offcourse the yearly excitement whether or not we're gonna have an Elfstedentocht (Eleven cities tour)In other news, our annual ´unexpected snow´ ritual started last weekend, meaning almost 1,000 km of traffic jams cluttered the roads during the initial snowfall last weekend plus, ofcourse (?), the railroad service went into ´winter service´ (an euphemism for less service, trains not running, delays, and what have you). So questions have been asked in parliament, the responsible minister addressed the Dutch Railroads, and as usual nothing will change until next year´s ´unexpected snow´ arrives. By contrast no disrupted railroad service is ever reported from our German neighbour, which usually gets quite a lot more snow that we do...
Thx. *hug*
Erm, well, tell us about the impeding breakup of Rutte's government!
I'm really clueless, so my questions may be somewhat stupid - bear with me.
First: Is this a sure thing, or is there some possibility that expecting elections is a bit premature?
The little i know suggests that Wilders' party are the ones who intentionally caused the breakup of the current minority goverment by withdrawing their support. Is that a tactical decision? I mean: Do they stand to gain from the election of a new lower house or are they merely reacting in defensive manner to the threat Rutte's budget potentially discrediting their populist credentials?
In short: I'm clueless and want to know what all this is about. Please explain it like i'm five.
Erm, well, tell us about the impeding breakup of Rutte's government!
I'm really clueless, so my questions may be somewhat stupid - bear with me.
First: Is this a sure thing, or is there some possibility that expecting elections is a bit premature?
The little i know suggests that Wilders' party are the ones who intentionally caused the breakup of the current minority goverment by withdrawing their support. Is that a tactical decision? I mean: Do they stand to gain from the election of a new lower house or are they merely reacting in defensive manner to the threat Rutte's budget potentially discrediting their populist credentials?
In short: I'm clueless and want to know what all this is about. Please explain it like i'm five.
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
Thx. *hug*
Erm, well, tell us about the impeding breakup of Rutte's government!
I'm really clueless, so my questions may be somewhat stupid - bear with me.
First: Is this a sure thing, or is there some possibility that expecting elections is a bit premature?
The little i know suggests that Wilders' party are the ones who intentionally caused the breakup of the current minority goverment by withdrawing their support. Is that a tactical decision? I mean: Do they stand to gain from the election of a new lower house or are they merely reacting in defensive manner to the threat Rutte's budget potentially discrediting their populist credentials?
In short: I'm clueless and want to know what all this is about. Please explain it like i'm five.
Elections are mandatory every four years. Since the last election has been less than four years ago, this means that elections aren't mandatory regardless the circumstances. In theory, the (rump) cabinet consisting of Mark Rutte's VVD and the CDA could continue until the mandatory election time, provided PM Mark Rutte doesn't declare his resignation to the queen.
However, since minority cabinets are perceived as unpractical, it is common for the PM to resign upon a sudden change in a cabinet, which generally leads to new elections. Another possibility is that another cabinet is negotiated while maintaining the make up of the lower house, which happened not too long ago.
The cabinet breakup was all about economics. The right-wing populist PVV opposed the proposed cuts in social services and refused to bow to the demands of the VVD and CDA. While the PVV was never officially part of the cabinet (hence, which is why the cabinet technically hasn't fallen), it pledged unconditional support to the plans of the cabinet, provided the cabinet agrees to some of its demands, which the PVV feels it no longer does.
So premature elections are designed to happen only intentionally - there are no mechanisms where that happens kind of semi-accidentally?
Rutte could theoretically try to push a budget through the lower house a few times and fail and that would be essentially no problem - appart from possibly being somewhat embarassing?
So it would be a somewhat normal "Dutch" thing to happen if...say Rutte and Wilders both gave a series of very resolute interviews issuing all kinds of demands meat up for some super-important negotiations and eventually came up with a new understanding a new de facto arrangement?
The coalition/toleration could continue with some minor adjustments (after some major media noise)?
Again, one of my questions is:
Who is the driving force here? Is the PVV abandoning the toleration because they feel they can gain from this?
Or is it the other way round and Rutte drafted a budget that he knew would hurt the PVVs popularity if they supported it?
And if he did, did he do so for that purpose, or is it more a collateral thing - li8ke he doesn't want to push the PVV out but it's a lesser evil since trying to force the budget is necessary to satisfy his own base?
Tahuti
Writing Deity
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2005
- Messages
- 9,492
Exactly. Certain proposals by Rutte were actually liked by the Left-Wing parties. The Dutch lower house has full control over the government budget, but having a government supported by the majority of its members makes things less complicated.
Yes, but that's highly unlikely.
I think Geert Wilders actually sincerely did this out of principle, even though usually, his principles aren't that good.
Rutte (and CDA's Maxime Verhagen) knew their budgetary ideas would hurt the PVV's popularity if it was to support it, but then again, backing down to accomodate the PVV would alienate VVD and CDA voters, who are generally supportive of austerity.
Heavy cuts (1000 per citizen) are needed right now to meet European budget norms. Obviously, such cuts are going to hurt. Supporting these cuts might be politically uneasy since the cabinet in charge of the cuts is probably going to get some blame for the cuts. (Which isn't quite fair, the international crisis and previous governments are much more to blame.) This blame game might be hardest on parties with more populist voters, less populist voters are more likely to recognize that the cuts are necessary.
I think the lower chamber can send the cabinet away, or at least push the cabinet pretty hard to give up, by a motion of no confidence. According to wiki, Dutch law isn't very explicit on this, but these kinds of motions are usually followed.
This is possible in theory. I don't think this is very likely. The relations between the PVV (23 out of 150 seats in the lower house) and the CDA (21)/VVD (31) have been damaged by this incident, so they won't be supporting each other. The PvdA (30) and the CDA are still not totally over the fight they had when they last ruled together and the SP (15) is too far to the left to be seriously considered by most parties. Currently, there are so many parties needed to get a majority and so many parties that still hold a grudge, that forming a coalition would be very hard.
Well, as I said, the lower house could send the cabinet away. Since everyone agrees that a cabinet that can build on a nice majority in the chamber would be helpful during this crisis, elections are very likely.
This is not quite clear. The PVV in general is kind of an enigma, they're very closed to the media and their internal proceedings are not so clear. Most commentators felt that Wilders was totally in charge of the party and the other members were just there as "voting cattle", voting along with whatever Geert says. However cracks have been appearing. Wilders has said that his party didn't agree with the plans and that's why he has stopped supporting them, but it is not clear if this is true at all.
Also, Wilders will be presenting a book in the States in May. Some people are saying that he's getting fed up with politics (and with being the most threatened person in the Netherlands) and is considering going to the States. He could give talks there, sit in conservative think tanks and sell his books and lead the live of a free citizen again. This is for example kinda what Hirsi Ali did.
The polls currently show:
VVD (liberal, right wing, focussed on economy) 33
SP (socialist, populist) 30
PvdA (social democratic) 24
PVV (Wilders, populist, conservative) 19
D66 (progressive, liberal, slightly leftwing) 15
CDA (christian democrats) 11
GroenLinks (green party) 5
So at least 3 parties are needed.
PvdA will never cooperate with PVV
D66 will probably not cooperate with PVV either
VVD and SP are very unlikely to cooperate
PVV has alienated the VVD and CDA in this move, so they're unlikely to cooperate
So in short: we're pretty much screwed. PVV and SP together are likely to hold 40-50 seats they're both so far away from the political center that few other parties will want to cooperate with them. This leads to a huge impasse in our politics.
However, I guess there's some hope that if elections will happen, during the run-up the usual parties (CDA, PvdA and VVD) will improve on their polls since they're the reasonable options.
Jan H
Prince
In the polls, why are the VVD going up (slightly), while the CDA are slashed to an almost irrelavant 11 seats (even less than D66)?
Are they somehow blamed more for the current impasse, than the VVD and PVV?
Are they somehow blamed more for the current impasse, than the VVD and PVV?
There was a large divide in the CDA over if they should join in the coalition. On the one hand, people wanted to take responsibility for the country. On the other hand, many people think the points off the PVV are contradictory to the main Christian points of the CDA. Wilders' xenophobia vs. Christian love for your neighbour, Wilders' opinions on Islam and the CDA ideal of freedom of religion. The CDA held a party day where it was discussed if they should join a coalition with the VVD/PVV. The discussion was pretty violent and emotional and in they end, they chose for power. This alienated the left wing of the party.
In the coalition, CDA held some hard cabinet posts, like integration, where their cabinet members didn't seem to find the balance between `Christian` policy and pleasing Wilders.
In the coalition, CDA held some hard cabinet posts, like integration, where their cabinet members didn't seem to find the balance between `Christian` policy and pleasing Wilders.
Jan H
Prince
So does that mean that, in the polls, CDA is now mainly loosing votes to the left-wing parties? (PVDA, SP, D66, GroenLinks)?
Second question, if there are going to be new elections, do you think the Belgian record of government-formation could be in danger? ;-)
Second question, if there are going to be new elections, do you think the Belgian record of government-formation could be in danger? ;-)
anandus
Errorist
Also a big problem of the CDA is their constituency. It's a party mainly for the elderly, I believe the average age of a CDA member is 67.
Next to that the party is more about controlling/having power than truely going for ideals and goals. They have some vague mottos about what the party is about, but in practice they tend to blow with the wind.
The growth of the VVD in the polls is comes from disaffected CDA-voters on their the left and some dissaffected PVV-voters on their right (although a lot of the disaffected PVV-voters tend to go over to the Socialist Party*).
So: Rightist inclined CDA-voters go to the VVD, leftist-inclined CDA-voters go to the Christian Union.
But! Must be said that the CDA has one of the most loyal voter blocs of all parties. Which doesn't count for much these days (also must be said that the PVV has a very loyal constituency nowadays).
The fact that the CDA seems at a loss has more to do with the fact that a relative large CDA in previous elections in the last decade had more to do with floating voters that voted for the CDA once in a while, if you know what I mean.
As you can see in this graph the relative large CDA in the last decade was more of an exception to the rule:
First off the CDA probably will not be so inclined to ruling with the PVV again (although they're also quite unwilling with ruling with the PvdA), and apart from the CDA and VVD there aren't that many parties wanting to rule with the PVV. Another issue is that the VVD will probably not be that much inclined to wanting to rule with the SP.
The problem is that those to parties on the extreme flanks account for about a third of the seats with about 25 seats each.
Then there are the two biggest parties, the VVD and the PvdA which can both count on about 30 seats each.
The rest of the parties will probably have less than 15 seats (or there abouts).
There are 150 seats in parliament, so 76 seats is the slimmest majority.
(the current government, including the PVV-support had 76 seats, now 75 seats because one person left the PVV)
Which means that probably a three-party majority is out of the question or on a very slim majority and there'll probably need to be a fourth party.
But it'll all depend on the outcome of the elections. Although all of the above are rough estimates of the seats, as you can see 5 seats here or there can completely change the possibilities and either make the formation process a lot shorter or a lot longer.
* The PVV is mainly based around xenophobia, but the rest of their program is a copy-paste of the Socialist Party program.
Next to that the party is more about controlling/having power than truely going for ideals and goals. They have some vague mottos about what the party is about, but in practice they tend to blow with the wind.
The growth of the VVD in the polls is comes from disaffected CDA-voters on their the left and some dissaffected PVV-voters on their right (although a lot of the disaffected PVV-voters tend to go over to the Socialist Party*).
No, that's hardly the case. The only left-wing party that CDA-voters would go to, that are leftist-inclined is the Christian Union. The PvdA and SP are too socialdemocratic/socialist for many CDA-voters and D66 and GL are too liberal for many CDA-voters.
So: Rightist inclined CDA-voters go to the VVD, leftist-inclined CDA-voters go to the Christian Union.
But! Must be said that the CDA has one of the most loyal voter blocs of all parties. Which doesn't count for much these days (also must be said that the PVV has a very loyal constituency nowadays).
The fact that the CDA seems at a loss has more to do with the fact that a relative large CDA in previous elections in the last decade had more to do with floating voters that voted for the CDA once in a while, if you know what I mean.
As you can see in this graph the relative large CDA in the last decade was more of an exception to the rule:
Hard to say. The last formation was one of the hardest there was. It will be difficult for several reasons.
First off the CDA probably will not be so inclined to ruling with the PVV again (although they're also quite unwilling with ruling with the PvdA), and apart from the CDA and VVD there aren't that many parties wanting to rule with the PVV. Another issue is that the VVD will probably not be that much inclined to wanting to rule with the SP.
The problem is that those to parties on the extreme flanks account for about a third of the seats with about 25 seats each.
Then there are the two biggest parties, the VVD and the PvdA which can both count on about 30 seats each.
The rest of the parties will probably have less than 15 seats (or there abouts).
There are 150 seats in parliament, so 76 seats is the slimmest majority.
(the current government, including the PVV-support had 76 seats, now 75 seats because one person left the PVV)
Which means that probably a three-party majority is out of the question or on a very slim majority and there'll probably need to be a fourth party.
But it'll all depend on the outcome of the elections. Although all of the above are rough estimates of the seats, as you can see 5 seats here or there can completely change the possibilities and either make the formation process a lot shorter or a lot longer.
* The PVV is mainly based around xenophobia, but the rest of their program is a copy-paste of the Socialist Party program.
That doesn´t seem to be correct, since it would mean the CDA is a fringe party (there was an Elderly Party some years ago, and they never got more than a couple of seats in parliament). Not even the average elected CDA member is that old.
Actually I can´t remember that ever happening. Dutch governments usually only present a budget after negotiation with coalition partners (which has been going on for the last couple of weeks). Also, there have been a few minority governments in the past, though not in recent years.
Actually, the PVV (or rather its leader Wilders) recently took a more noisy stand after polls suggested the party would loose 6 seats if elections would have been held last week.
I wouldn´t know anything about that. Wilders main ´principle´ seems to be to get in the news, and that he does.
Well, one has to remind oneself these are polls. Different polls show different results. At bestany poll can show a trend that might not materialize if elections were actually held. (Plus there´s the obvious margin of error to reckon with.)
Hardly. The Belgians may keep there Guinness record.
(I skipped the first question as I don´t follow polls.)
anandus
Errorist
Members are not the same as voters.
It probably also says more about how party membership is viewed by younger people than about the CDA perse.
Edit:
I was wrong. The age of 67 was according to a poll under CDA-members. But apparently the poll was skewed.
According to the CDA itself the average age of a member is 58.
