Political Update - Fall of the Dutch government

On the morning of June 3, Geert Wilders, the leader of the largest coalition party, the PVV, announced his party’s withdrawal from the Dutch four-party coalition, stating he had “signed up for the strictest asylum policy in Dutch history, but not for the downfall of the Netherlands.” Wilders first withdrew the PVV ministers from the cabinet. Following this, Prime Minister Dick Schoof declared the resignation of the cabinet during an emergency meeting and formally offered the resignation to the King. In the Dutch constitutional system, this is a ceremonial but essential step: the King accepts the resignation “with the utmost respect,” after which the cabinet continues in a demissionary (caretaker) capacity.

The ministers from the remaining three coalition parties – VVD, NSC, and BBB – will continue under Prime Minister Schoof in a caretaker capacity, meaning they are limited in their actions and can only handle routine matters. Parliament determines which issues are considered “controversial” and must be deferred until a new government is formed. These typically include major policy changes, new legislation, or international commitments. The status of such a cabinet is politically constrained but legally still empowered to govern.

A parliamentary debate on the fall of the cabinet is scheduled for today (June 4) at 10:25 AM. These debates are often emotionally charged and politically strategic. They serve to clarify the reasons for the cabinet’s fall, allow parties to position themselves ahead of elections, and may include motions of censure or no confidence. Based on current reporting, opposition parties such as GL-PvdA, D66, and SP are expected to be highly critical of the PVV’s role, while VVD and BBB may attempt to shift blame and preserve their electoral standing.

New elections are expected in October or November 2025. Current polls suggest that a new right-wing coalition is unlikely, while a coalition including GroenLinks-PvdA, a left-wing party which emerged after the merger of the Netherlands’ green and labour parties ahead of the previous elections, appears more feasible. Although Wilders has expressed ambitions to become Prime Minister, it remains to be seen whether this is feasible. Analysts note that his decision to collapse the cabinet may have been a strategic move to halt a decline in the polls – from 37 to around 30 seats – but it could also damage his credibility as a coalition partner and reduce his chances of becoming Prime Minister.

‍

Recent developments leading to the cabinet’s collapse

The collapse of this cabinet comes as no surprise to many observers. From the outset, the coalition was seen as fragile. It was formed in June 2024 as an extraparliamentary construction: the four party leaders – Wilders (PVV), Yesilgöz (VVD), Omtzigt (NSC), and Van der Plas (BBB) – remained in the House of Representatives, while the cabinet was composed partly of non-partisan ministers and experts. Dick Schoof, a former intelligence chief and senior civil servant, was appointed Prime Minister with a limited mandate to implement the coalition agreement. His relationship with Wilders and the other party leaders was often strained, and his room to manoeuvre was limited. For example, during the negotiations on asylum and the so-called Voorjaarsnota (Spring Memorandum), Schoof was reportedly caught between conflicting demands and lacked the political authority to impose compromise.

While the fall was predictable due to ongoing tensions, it is also surprising that the cabinet managed to survive several critical moments, including the negotiations over the Voorjaarsnota, which outlines the government’s budgetary plans and adjustments for the year and is a key moment in the fiscal calendar. The coalition overcame several near-breakdowns, including disputes over nitrogen policy and defence spending.

Initially united, the cabinet (Ministers and State Secretaries) has recently shown signs of internal discord. Wilders has increasingly voiced his frustration on social media and in Parliament regarding the slow progress by PVV Minister for Asylum and Migration, Marjolein Faber. However, he rarely blamed Faber directly. Instead, he accused the other coalition parties of obstructing progress. He also held an unusual press conference – rare for a coalition leader – to present ten proposals to tighten asylum policy. Some measures were already part of existing policy or the coalition agreement, while others were criticised by the media for potentially infringing on fundamental rights.

Wilders withdrew from the coalition on 3 June 2025, after his coalition partners refused to endorse most of his proposals and amend the agreement. His decision was seen by some as a calculated move to regain control of the political narrative and avoid further erosion in the polls. However, political commentators argue that this may backfire: his unilateral action may have undermined trust among potential coalition partners and could isolate him politically.

‍

Interests of Wilders and the PVV

The PVV is a right-wing populist party in the Netherlands, known for its strong anti-immigration stance. Geert Wilders is its sole member and exercises complete control, with no internal democracy. The party's confrontational, media-driven style primarily focuses on asylum and Islam but has expanded to include subsistence security.

Wilders’ primary political objective is to reduce asylum inflows. His voters strongly feel stricter asylum legislation is needed. By dominating the political and media agenda on this topic, Wilders intends to increase his electorate. However, in the Coalition, PVV Minister Faber made little progress in reducing the influx of asylum seekers. Other policy areas, such as foreign affairs, defence, and housing, recently received more political and media attention – often to Wilders’ disadvantage.

Recent polls indicate that the PVV will fall from 37 to around 30 seats if elections were held today. Political analysts interpret Wilders’ departure from the coalition as a strategic move to halt further decline. However, several experts warn that his actions may reduce his chances of becoming Prime Minister or forming a new coalition.

‍

Coalition partners: VVD, NSC, and BBB

Leaders and ministers from the remaining coalition parties have responded with anger and disbelief, describing the PVV’s resignation from the Cabinet as “unnecessary,” “incomprehensible,” “embarrassing,” and “irresponsible.”

For NSC (New Social Contract), this development likely signifies a significant decline in the number of Parliamentary seats. Founded in 2023 by Pieter Omtzigt, who recently stepped down due to health issues, the party is currently polling at 0 to 2 seats.

BBB (Farmers and Citizens Movement), viewed as a pillar of the Coalition and ideologically closest to the PVV, is also experiencing substantial losses in the polls. With few tangible results delivered for its core constituency – farmers – the party faces an uncertain future in the upcoming elections.

The VVD, the most experienced and traditional party in the coalition, remains stable in the polls and will likely approach the new elections with confidence. Over the past years, the VVD has shifted to the right in an attempt to attract voters from the PVV and JA21. This has brought the party further from centrist and left-leaning parties, complicating future coalition options. Nonetheless, the party is concerned that the current right-wing majority in Parliament may be lost.

‍

Opposition

Opposition parties are in unanimous agreement concerning the necessity for new elections. Several parties have shown increasing support in recent polls, including the Green-Labour party (GL-PvdA), the Christian Democrats (CDA), the Democrats (D66), and the Socialist Party (SP). These parties remain hopeful about the possibility of assembling a more left-leaning coalition following the election, though they have not been without their disagreements in the past.

‍

Near future

Until new elections are held, the Ministers from VVD, NSC, and BBB will govern in a caretaker capacity. This means only routine matters will be addressed, and issues (legislation, debates, political dossiers, etc.) voted controversial by the House of Representatives will be deferred. Parliament will likely decide in the coming days which topics are too contentious to be handled by the caretaker government.

As it stands, several key issues remain on the agenda in the coming months. Most notably, the NATO summit in The Hague later this month will require careful organisation. Parliament must also decide whether the caretaker Cabinet may proceed with decisions on other critical dossiers, e.g. defence spending, nitrogen policy, agriculture, energy transition, and housing.

The fall of the cabinet also affects the implementation of the recently negotiated Voorjaarsnota. While the budget itself remains valid, new spending initiatives or reallocations may be delayed or blocked. This could have consequences for public investment, social programs, and fiscal planning. For example, the carefully negotiated Zorgakkoord (Healthcare Agreement) may be halted and a rent freeze for tenants in social housing, hotly debated in recent weeks, has been withdrawn by housing minister Mona Keijzer, who compared Wilders’ move to “a betrayal of the Netherlands.”