An important part of the opposition is against cuts in youth care. The cabinet does not have a majority in the Senate and therefore hopes mainly for support from PvdA and GroenLinks or from JA21 for government policy. It is precisely these three parties who speak out against the youth care plans.
In the debate about the government statement that starts on Tuesday, the three parties will demand that the cuts of half a billion in youth care, which this cabinet is booking for the longer term, are dropped. “This is unwise,” said GroenLinks leader Jesse Klaver. “Precisely in a place where there are already huge waiting lists, if you cut back on that, the consequences can be disastrous.”
JA21 foreman Joost Eerdmans calls the austerity plans “unsustainable”. The three opposition parties will present a joint motion and other opposition parties will probably also join in. “I think those children should not be left out in the cold,” says Eerdmans.
There are waiting lists in youth care and municipalities say that there have been enormous problems for years. The municipalities receive too little money from the government to be able to help all children. Some of the municipalities were therefore forced to cut back on other expenses, such as on swimming pools, in order to be able to pay for care.
The municipalities will receive additional money for a number of years to solve these problems, according to the coalition agreement. This had already been agreed upon, after the intervention of a committee of wise men. But the municipalities were shocked when they read that half a billion a year has been deducted from the amount that has been agreed to improve youth care in the long term. Although the municipalities receive more money than they currently receive, less than was agreed on what is needed to provide good youth care.
Consultation declined
The mayor of The Hague Jan van Zanen is also chairman of the Association of Dutch Municipalities (VNG) and in that role called the cuts “unbecoming”, moreover, they would go against previous agreements. Last Thursday he called this cabinet plan a plan “with consequences that are unacceptable for municipalities, residents – vulnerable young people – and very bad for mutual relationships.” The VNG refuses to consult with the cabinet about improvements in youth care as long as the cabinet wants to continue the cuts.
GroenLinks leader Klaver says that he will vote against the cuts. Klaver does not want to threaten to vote down certain budgets in the Senate, he hopes that the cabinet will listen and that that threat is not necessary. When asked whether it would be better to do business with him if the cabinet renounces this cutback, he does say: “Ultimately, if the coalition is sympathetic to this, you can also expect something from us in return. Of course.” Eerdmans emphasizes that it may become difficult for the cabinet to find a majority in the Senate now that these three opposition parties are joining forces.
The Central Planning Bureau (CPB) already expressed last week: criticism of the cabinet plans to cut spending on youth care. At the time, the CPB wrote that the cabinet could try to achieve this saving of half a billion by introducing a personal contribution or by agreeing a maximum treatment time. However, the CPB’s accountants refused to calculate the plans “because these proposals have not been worked out sufficiently”.
More tricky points
State Secretary Maarten van Ooijen (Public Health) said last week in response to the concerns of municipalities: “I will discuss this with municipalities and of course also discuss their concerns with my colleagues, the Minister of the Interior and the State Secretary of Finance who is responsible for the municipal fund. In a broad sense, the cabinet wants to work together with municipalities in the coming period on sustainable, stable financing for municipalities.” Van Ooijen also referred directly to Tuesday’s debate on the government statement and added: “I am confident that we will come out of this together.”
In the debate on the government statement, there will not only be criticism of the plans with youth care, but the entire coalition agreement will be examined during this debate. The fact that the government does not want the AOW to rise as fast as the minimum wage is also a sensitive issue, for example. But the fact that the national debt will rise in the long term is also a point of criticism. Just like the way in which the government spends money on funds, without having much plans to do so, is a sensitive issue for a number of parties. Left-wing parties are annoyed that the government is not doing enough to tax wealth.
–
