How the BBB has highlighted the challenge of compromise

The 2023 elections, in which parties like the PVV and BBB (BoerBurgerBeweging) achieved stunning victories have revealed growing frustration among the Dutch public, often outweighing rationality in choosing leadership. While it is vital to honor the democratic choice, granting the BBB significant control despite their limited policy depth has so far proven counterproductive. The party leader and current coalition member Caroline van der Plas is the frontrunner and face of the Farmer’s party of the Netherlands that was started on the heels of the Farmer’s protests during the government of Rutte III in 2019. Francisco Panizza, one of the contributors in the field of populism highlights how populist leaders construct emotional and symbolic narratives to unify their voter and support base. Van der Plas does this by presenting rural farmers as the embodiment of Dutch values and framing nitrogen policies as an existential threat to their way of life and oppressive towards the backbone of the Dutch lifestyle. The emotional appeal amplifies her support among voters who feel disenfranchised from urban-centric policies and feel the government in the Hague does not have their best interests at heart. 

They started as a simple Twitter account named BoerBurgerTweet, which highlighted the growing frustrations of the nitrogen policies outlined by the former VVD-led government. These cutbacks on nitrogen and forced shrinking of the agricultural sector to combat the growth of climate change and to further follow through on the promises made to the EU regarding their Green Deal, there were proposed plans to buy out farmers and remove nitrogen usage near primarily nature sites which negatively affected both the flora and the local wildlife. Biodiversity was being severely affected by excessive nitrogen use which caused ecological degradation and a cascading loss of wildlife in areas close to farmers. While nowhere near perfect, the former Rutte-led cabinet had plans to work on reducing the massive effect this had on the biodiversity and nature of these particular areas by working with local farmers to phase out their nitrogen use or buy them out for a healthy sum of money as a result of loss of profits and business. The issue started due to larger agricultural businesses heavily pushing back against the proposed plans by imposing a coordinated ad campaign and sending further anger by adding misinformation to the mix. 

In that chaos, Caroline van der Plas unequivocally showed herself as the voice for the Farmers while being someone who came from the larger businesses in the Agricultural sector, namely Agrio Uitgeverij. Despite people knowing that she miscontrues or misinterprets information to make a point based on a fallacy, she won broad support in the municipal elections as well as the provincial elections which decided the members of the First Chamber. This reflects a broader national reluctance to compromise or make sacrifices necessary to meet international commitments and treaty obligations. Not necessarily out of spite, but one where even the EU is seeing broader pushback stemming from other countries. Populist leaders, who make their platform based on the growing discontent and frustration at the status quo, gain power and proceed to stifle change and meaningful policymaking while threatening to pull out of the coalition because of proposed plans. Panizza makes the point that populism relies on constructing 'the people' as a unified moral stance, often contrasted against a corrupt elite or ruling class. Van der Plas does exactly this by framing rural farmers as the backbone of Dutch identity and society fighting against the urban policymakers and EU regulations that perceived as tone-deaf and oppressive towards what made the Netherlands what it is today. Most recently talking about the manure policies from her own minister within the cabinet, she threatened to resign as the head of the party if they forced shrinking within the sector because of following through with the plans of the former Rutte IV government.  Hindering legislation while proposing no alternatives while being a member of the coalition instead of the opposition is quite antithetical to what a coalition partnership is meant to entail. 

And once again, this highlights how she and her party challenge the principles of compromise which were central to the politics of the last decade in the Hague. The key issues like nitrogen policy and the Groningen gas extraction scandal were pivotal in the downfall of Rutte IV. Yet, over 100 days into the Schoof cabinet, governance remains as dysfunctional as during the height of those controversies. Caroline van der Plas who is a fresh face leading the Dutch House of Representatives, is undoubtedly diligent and hardworking. However, her actions have done little to mitigate the obstacles to achieving environmental goals established over the past decade. While Geert Wilders and the PVV focus on stricter migration and border policies, the BBB prioritizes regional dominance and agricultural policy. Many new officials sympathize with the BBB or have direct affiliations with the party, leading to a consolidation of power at local levels. This begs the question: now that more liberal politics have been sidelined, can we endure the current inertia? Where there is no room for compromise on legislation with the Farmer’s party and where the Party for Freedom focuses on their campaign rhetoric rather than meaningful change – how sustainable is another four years of misprioritization of what the needs of the country are, we will only drift farther from the goalpost people expected with this government. If instability, miscommunication, and mistrust define the status quo, how long will people start to lose their trust and demand sweeping change just as they did from the previous government? Rather than collaborating as a coalition, the ruling parties seem more intent on operating as opposing factions within their own government. And as the saying goes, “A House Divided Cannot Stand”. The Dutch people deserve better. The last five years have hit everyone hard, and people are still reeling. While you can understand people shifting their support, it might be time for a shift back if we are to enter into the new decade as both a healthy economy and democracy and once again regain our economic foothold in Europe. 

Brandon Wong