Dutch Budget, Constitutional Matters, Role in Society and Other Issues

[Marengo]

Today the Royal Hosue will be discussed in parlament.

There was some criticism on the Queen this summer when she formed a government. She didn't pick the informateur as suggested by a majority, but somebody else. Now there is a discussion about limiting the role of the Queen in this process.

The Labour party now asks the prime minister for a 'vision' about the future of the monarchy. They also want to limit the role of the Queen in the formation process and they want clarity about the idiotic tweets of the RVD about the Horsten estate.

PvdA wil notitie Rutte over 'modern Koningschap' - Kabinet-Rutte - VK

The newspaper also wonders if the queen will have any political influence left after today:
http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2686...eatrix-na-vandaag-nog-politieke-invloed.dhtml

 

[Henri M]

Today the Second Chamber of the States-General (the Lower House) discussed the Budget of the Department of General Affairs (the Premier's department) including Chapter 1 of the State Budget: 'The King'. This reading of this particular chapter of the Budget is always reason to discuss the monarchy. Today it happened with the new young Premier, Mr Mark Rutte (three months older than the Prince of Orange). The new Premier turned out to be an eloquent defender of the monarchy.

The leader of D66 (progressive liberals), Mr Alexander Pechtold, wanted the traditional wording of Acts and Royal Decrees to be 'modernized'. All Acts and Royal Decrees start with the formula We Beatrix, by the grace of God Queen of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau, Etc., Etc., Etc.
Mr Pechtold wondered if this 'anachronism' of by the grace of God could not be removed? He also wanted the closing formula And herewith We command You in the Lord's holy protection no longer to be used. Premier Mr Mark Rutte did not want to change anything at all about this formula. He urged Mr Pechtold not trying to repair what is not defect at all. The Premier stated that he was attached to this tradition of generations and felt no any need for changing this.

Mr Pechtold also wanted a review of the use of the predicate Koninklijk (Royal) which is bestowed by Royal Decree. An example: KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, Royal Dutch/Shell Oil, Etc. Premier Mr Rutte waved this suggestion away. He stated that the companies involved attach great importance and a recognition in the honour to use the predicate Koninklijk. So no change either.

Mrs Ineke van Gend (GreenLeft) wanted that the Queen and members of the Royal House should invest their capital in green and sustainable portfolios. The Premier pointed that this belonged to the private sphere of the Queen and the members of the Royal House.

Some fractions requested the Premier to end the freedom of succession taxes for heritances from the (former) Sovereign to the (future) Sovereign. It was not fair that all Dutchmen are sujected to succession taxes but that the King was exempted from that. Premier Mr Rutte explained that this exception was especially made by the lawmaker because of the nature of the constitution: the head of state is delivered by hereditary succession. It was in the own interest of the State that the successors do have the royal possessions at their disposal rather than having all this fragmented due to succession taxes.

Various fractions requested Premier Mr Rutte that the three members of the Royal House who receive a donation (the Queen, the Prince of Orange and Princess Máxima) should pay income taxes over these donations. The Premier found this 'just cosmetic' since it was the State which hands over a netto amount. Making the State handing over a bruto amount first and then taking back a part in the form of taxes made no sense according him.

The spokesman for Labour, Mr Pierre Heijnen, wanted that the Premier should write a memorandum on the modernization of the kingship. The Premier pointed out that in 2000 the then Premier, Mr Wim Kok, already wrote a Note on the Kingship and that this is still fully actual. Moreover in 2002 there came a new Royal House Act and in 2009 a new Act on the financial statute of the Royal House. He thought that the Chamber must not act as if the monarchy was not evoluing.

Some fractions wanted to end the constitutional situation that the King is an integral member of the Government and is President of the Council of State (the highest advisory body and highest Court of Administration). The Premier stressed that this situation anchors the King into the Government, with full ministerial responsibility. Taking the King out of this constellation would create a separate entity aside the Government and that was 'not desirable'.

Then there were questions about political influence of the King. The Premier urged the Chamber that since 1848 the King is inviolable and that the ministers are responsible. The King has no independent political powers. All decisions come from the Cabinet and if the Chamber thinks the King has political influence then they are in fact not trusting the Premier in making his own decisions.

Then there were some more little questions about the expenses of the Royal House, about the sale of the properties of the Prince of Orange in Mozambique, about the management of the Crown Domains, about the Royal House Archives and so on, which were all answered by the Premier.

Most likely the Second Chamber will accept a Motion in which is regulated that the Chamber will assemble together after elections and nominate an informateur. This instead of having the King this role. But this Motion was already accepted in 1971 and recently in 2010. Never the Chamber could agree on this, so we still have to see of the Chamber will take consequence of their own Motions.



Henri.

 

[Marengo]

An article from dutchnews.nl:

Restrict the queen to ceremonial duties only, says a majority of MPs

Wednesday 17 November 2010
A majority of MPs wants the queen to be restricted to ceremonial duties only, it emerged during a parliamentary debate on Wednesday afternoon.
Only the ruling VVD and CDA and two minor Christian parties want the queen to continue in her present role as formal head of the government and retain her membership of important advisory committees.

Read more here.

The prime minister didn't agree with any commentsof the opposition, so it is very unlikely that anything will change. Esp. now the media interest of the last days is not focussed on this issuie but on all the criminals that are popping up in the PVV party of Widlers.

And some proposals were rather odd of course. The Green Left party proposed that the Queen has to invest her private funds in a sustainable and ethical investments.

Rutte legt Oranjes geen strobreed in de weg - Kabinet-Rutte - VK

---

In the mean time the change of the PvdA (labour) is critizised from within. Former minister of Interior and former mayor of Amsterdam, Ed van Thijn says that his party is on the same populist route as others with this issue.

'PvdA laat zich leiden door populisme' - Binnenland | Het laatste nieuws uit Nederland leest u op Telegraaf.nl [binnenland]

 

[Jacknch]

Interesting articles. I hardly think it is for the good of the country to leave political and constitutional matters and matters relating to the running of the country solely in the hands of MPs without some capable guidance from someone who actually knows what they're doing (i.e. Queen Beatrix)! MPs come and go and they rarely carry out their duties properly and for the common good! Some of these MPs have a damn cheek to think they have the right to put themselves in a position whereby they can suggest such changes which are clearly based on their own private views.

I would hope that Queen Beatrix could be granted the right to handbag the lot of them - now THAT would be a positive change to the constitution!

 

[Marengo]

Ad Verbrugge, philosopher at the VU (University) critisized Queen Beatrix in an article in the NRC last week for being too cosmopolitan. He claims that he is a monarchist but he feels betrayed by the Queen and by Princess Máxima (due to the princess remarks on the Dutch identity in 2007).

In Dutch:
http://digitaleeditie.nrc.nl/NH/2011/1/20110205___/2_10/lowres_page.pdf

 

[lucien]

Ad Verbrugge, philosopher at the VU (University) critisized Queen Beatrix in an article in the NRC last week for being too cosmopolitan. He claims that he is a monarchist but he feels betrayed by the Queen and by Princess Máxima (due to the princess remarks on the Dutch identity in 2007).

In Dutch:
http://digitaleeditie.nrc.nl/NH/2011/1/20110205___/2_10/lowres_page.pdf

Oh really?What crap to escape oblivion by that Verbrugge thing,he must have really felt he was locked out from the cosmos.And the Princess was right ofcourse,you can not in all honesty compare a Limbourgian with a Frisian,or a Zeeuw with a Utrechtenaar....unless it's Gijsbert from Boer zoekt Vrouw...than all differences go up in steam..uhh,smoke.Yeah,right,I make a joke of it,but Verbrugge started it!Hah....
No,and I didn't even read that pdf file,not worth the trouble on such a lame accusation.

 

[Marengo]

The Green left party wants to discuss the role of the Queen. They want to go to the 'Swedish model' in which the head of state has only a ceremonial function and no political role:

Google Vertaling

The party hopes that the constitution can be changed before the enthronement of the Prince of Orange (whenever that may be).

 

[lucien]

The Green left party wants to discuss the role of the Queen. They want to go to the 'Swedish model' in which the head of state has only a ceremonial function and no political role:

Google Vertaling

The party hopes that the constitution can be changed before the enthronement of the Prince of Orange (whenever that may be).

They only utter that nonsense in election time,which it is now,thinking they gain a vote over the back of the RF.Been there,done that.Apparently there is a majority for a symbolic Monarchy in Parliament,yet when it comes to the actual vote...they all step back and leave evrything as it is.And thank God it is as it is,HM thus saves us from overzealous green wannabees,a green hype so to speak.And we can absolutely do without them,and that.Besides,it's easy for them to scream,they do not have government responsibility,non of them have an inkling on that,and I would mcu appreciate if that was to remain the case.They will have to re-invent themselves before their taken seriously,ever.And campaign on their own merits instead of using HM as a scapegoat,because that is what these succers do.There is not one single reason why would benefit from a so-called "Swedish Model",not one,so boring these guys...

 

[Marengo]

From the website Radio Netherlands:

The Dutch queen is said to be one of the most powerful monarchs in Europe. That might not be true of her successor if parliament gets its way. And this time the move to reform the monarchy is not only coming from parties on the left – Geert Wilders’ populist Freedom Party is proposing the most radical changes.
The Kingdom of The Netherlands is one of Europe’s ten surviving constitutional monarchies. But unlike many of her fellow European royals, Queen Beatrix does more than cut ribbons and welcome foreign heads of state graciously. She has real power. Or, at least, influence. She initiates the process of forming a government in the wake of an election – a crucial role in this country of coalitions. She meets privately every week with the prime minister and is officially both a member of the cabinet and chairs the Council of State, a powerful advisory body.
She is not shy about using her influence. But since it is taboo to reveal anything she thinks or says, it is difficult to measure the exact extent of that influence.

Read the entire article here.

The party that made the design this time is the PVV, the extreme right anti-immigrant party of Geert Wilders. He also wants the king/queen to take an oath that he/she is independant. In the past Wilders critisized HM and the RF several times and he considers them part of the left wingers who are against him. HM made several remarks in speeches and such expressing her worry about the course fo the public debate (very anti-immigrant at the moment). The bill doesn't have a chance since the Labour party changed their opinion and opposed it (the Christian Demcrats and the Liberal party of PM Rutte already opposed it, as do the various small christian parties.

 

[Marengo]

Royalblog listed some commentaries in newspapers etc.:

'Koningin Beatrix wint makkelijk de presidentsverkiezingen' - Achtergronden ROYALBLOG.NL

Almost all commentators are against the change. The main arguments:

- there are more pressing matters (economic crisis) than debating a constitutional change that will never reach a majority anyway.
- the proposals will give the queen more instead of less 'power'
- the queen/king will be able to behave as a 'loose cannon' in the future
- the proposal seems an essay of a highschool student who copied/pasted most things after a google search
- the proposal is full of 'hearsay' and not based on real facts

In short: nothing will change.

 

[An Ard Ri]

From the website Radio Netherlands:



Read the entire article here.

The party that made the design this time is the PVV, the extreme right anti-immigrant party of Geert Wilders. He also wants the king/queen to take an oath that he/she is independant. In the past Wilders critisized HM and the RF several times and he considers them part of the left wingers who are against him. HM made several remarks in speeches and such expressing her worry about the course fo the public debate (very anti-immigrant at the moment). The bill doesn't have a chance since the Labour party changed their opinion and opposed it (the Christian Demcrats and the Liberal party of PM Rutte already opposed it, as do the various small christian parties.

I was reading this in the Irish Times last week.

 

[Marengo]

Last weekw e had the debate of the 'house of the King' in parlament. Lots of talks, lots of plans nbut no majority for anything so nothing will change. What a surprise...

 

[lucien]

Last weekw e had the debate of the 'house of the King' in parlament. Lots of talks, lots of plans nbut no majority for anything so nothing will change. What a surprise...

How lovely...They know all too well it would cost them votes,as in general,the Dutch have an abundance of grey cells where needed as most MP's lack of it and try to gain a popular vote over the backs of the Members of the RF.Wrong thinking!It backfires str8t...did I write that...in their faces.So,they pull back their unfounded oh's and ah's and keep their big mouthes shut.As they should!Love that!Hah!

 

[lucien]

Dutch Parliament today agreed on the Head of State,the Monarch,not having any role after the next elections in regard to appointing a formateur or informateur,a role that hithherto was the prerogative of HM The Queen.

There is a majority of 91 votes in the Second Chamber( out of the 150) in favor of the new meassures,something that wasn't agreed on even last week but after alterations by the Green party the,mostly,left parties agreed.Hmm.

 

[royalistbert]

Dutch Parliament today agreed on the Head of State,the Monarch,not having any role after the next elections in regard to appointing a formateur or informateur,a role that hithherto was the prerogative of HM The Queen.

There is a majority of 91 votes in the Second Chamber( out of the 150) in favor of the new meassures,something that wasn't agreed on even last week but after alterations by the Green party the,mostly,left parties agreed.Hmm.

Reading this makes my blood boil! The Queen is hardly a dictator! I would understand is she was abusing this power but this seems really unfair. I like the monarchs having some teeth!

 

[COUNTESS]

As they are not elected and are born into position, the reason there are constitutional monarchs, is because they are most powerless. The government is run by elected officials. The same as republics.

 

[James VI]

As they are not elected and are born into position, the reason there are constitutional monarchs, is because they are most powerless. The government is run by elected officials. The same as republics.

Yes but most European Monarchs ( Carl VI Gustaf excepted ) still have these residual powers, powers of Royal Prerogative which are necessary safeguards, underpining the Constitution, not subverting it !! As we have seen in Europe, Asia and North America, it is not unelected Monarchs who cannot be trusted with Constitutional Government........

 

[royalistbert]

Yes but most European Monarchs ( Carl VI Gustaf excepted ) still have these residual powers, powers of Royal Prerogative which are necessary safeguards, underpining the Constitution, not subverting it !! As we have seen in Europe, Asia and North America, it is not unelected Monarchs who cannot be trusted with Constitutional Government........

Exactly politicians should stop messing with constitutions and get on with governing the country. Absolute power corrupts absolutely!

 

[Marengo]

According to several academics this might not be a very wise change. Considering the unstable political situation lately (with new populist parties popping up out of nowhere all of a sudden, it may be very difficult for the chamber to agree on a (in)formateur. They also say that it is esp. unwise that they close the door alltogether. In the proposed law there will be no option for the parlament to ask for the head of state to act as an in-between when things in parlament can't be worked out.

Anyway... you would expect that there were other priorities in parlament than fixing something that isn't broken.... the draconian budget cuts for example. I can't imagine this would have ever passed a normal majority government since the liberals and christians are utterly against it. But as usual Rutte just does whatever Wilders tells him to do... and usually with one of his enormous grins.

 

[lucien]

According to several academics this might not be a very wise change. Considering the unstable political situation lately (with new populist parties popping up out of nowhere all of a sudden, it may be very difficult for the chamber to agree on a (in)formateur. They also say that it is esp. unwise that they close the door alltogether. In the proposed law there will be no option for the parlament to ask for the head of state to act as an in-between when things in parlament can't be worked out.

Anyway... you would expect that there were other priorities in parlament than fixing something that isn't broken.... the draconian budget cuts for example. I can't imagine this wopuld have ever passed a normal majority government since the liberals and christians are utterly against it. But as usual Rutte just does whatever Wilders tells him to do... and usually with one of his enormous grin.

Oh but Parliament can call upon Her if they can't fix it themselves.Indeed,alltogether a downright stupid move.HM saved us all from an overdose of democracy as politicians claim they act due to votes but instead just love to see thermselves first and foremost and fulltime.

You know the present hullabaloo was started by Mozart Wilders as he felt left out by HM during the last elections and subsequent forming of a government.The twit.I wonder,when will it be his time to leave the stage......in any way,I couldn't care less...I do really really hope it sooo backfires in their faces.And it will eventually,as you say Marengo,with these populist bubbles of emptyness and bull,chances are they never agree and people get so fet up with the likes of GW they sent him off alltogether.Too nausiating a lot.

They have been at this move for the past 40 years starting in 1971,but never found a majority or were to chicken,or realistic knowing full well what mess it could become.I hope so

 

[Marengo]

Well, today there is a new political situation. Hero Brinkman left the PVV party and with that the government coalition lost its -shaky- majority. They will need to fall back on the orthodox christian party for support, which means that that party can demand things in return. And the party is against any change in the role of the monarch. It will be interesting to see how things will develop, new elections hopefully (though not likely).

 

[royalistbert]

I know nothing of situation in the Netherlands. I'm guessing the queen gets to keep her powers because no one can come to an agreement.

 

[James VI]

Diamond Queens

On matters of constitutional right and political principle, it would appear that Queen Beatrix, like Queen Elizabeth, is the better of any man....

 

[Somebody]

In an interview today (article in Dutch) looking back at the longest government formation process ever in the Netherlands, the current and future prime minister looked back at the process and stated that it wasn't helpful that the Sovereign has been removed from the formation process since 2012. In his opinion, the process wouldn't have taken this long with the king at the helm.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

In an interview today (article in Dutch) looking back at the longest government formation process ever in the Netherlands, the current and future prime minister looked back at the process and stated that it wasn't helpful that the Sovereign has been removed from the formation process since 2012. In his opinion, the process wouldn't have taken this long with the king at the helm.

I am not sure how King Willem-Alexander would have hurried the formation. But then at least someone "owns" the process and as head of state he can urge politicians.

It would also help the King to get some stature because the formation of a new Cabinet was the only act in which we still saw some real meaning of the kingship. For the rest it is 99% ceremonial and protocol, making that the German Bundespräsident or the Italian President has more constitutional weight than the King.

Since the Second Chamber appoints the formateurs, no one owns the process as it are three or four parties together who have to agree and that is not easy: it drags on and on as the parties are playing chess with each other.

 

[Somebody]

The pm agrees as he explained the difference wouldn't have been months but in his eyes it would have helped to have that independent process manager (my words, not his) instead of the politicians themselves trying to organize themselves (while having lots of personal/political interests).

 

[Somebody]

Currently, parliament is reconsidering their procedures for government formation. In 2012 they decided to take the monarch out of the equation but last time the process took a very long time and was rather bumpy, partly because the people in charge were politically affiliated and interested party. So, now they figured that they need someone who is less involved with the party politics to manage the process. Several political parties are in favour of tasking the monarch with this role. However, it seems they won't get a majority. The parties that decided against it a little over 10 years ago are unlikely to retrace their steps.

Articles in Dutch: Most recent one and an earlier one by NOS.

 

[Somebody]

The election manifestos or the answers to a questionnaire developed for voters to decide which party to vote for show that a large majority of parties is in favor of the king also paying income and wealth tax. Until now, he is exempt for income, inheritance and wealth related to the office of king (they already pay taxes on private wealth). Only four parties do not agree: the liberal party (VVD) and the three Christian parties (CDA, CU and SGP).

See for example this article on NOS (in Dutch).

 

[Marengo]

If this gets through it will mean an enormous income decrease for members of the RF, nearly 50%. It will require a constitutional change as well. But considering only a few parties are against it is likely that after the elections there will be proposals forthcoming.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

https://www.dutchnews.nl/2023/11/live-blog-dutch-election-day-as-it-happens/

Dutch royals don’t vote

Princesses Amalia and Alexia are not voting in the general election despite reaching the age of 18, the state information service has told the Telegraaf. King Willem-Alexander and queen Máxima do not use their votes either, because of their wish to be politically neutral.

The king said in 2017 that if voting was compulsory in the Netherlands, he would leave the ballot paper blank.

His niece Eloise van Oranje, who has 428,000 followers on her Instagram account, did set out to vote but was turned away from the polling station because she had forgotten her ID.

Perhaps other posters could find the original RVD statement and/or explain which adult members do and don't vote?