Elections are just around the corner. There is ample focus on students among the Dutch political parties. Resource lists the key topics in the draft election programmes with the help of the press agency for higher education (Hoger Onderwijs Persbureau)
Basic grant
The basic grant was reinstated as of this academic year, but according to some parties, more is needed. BIJ1, Forum voor Democratie (FvD), BoerBurgerBeweging (BBB) and Partij voor de Dieren (PvdD) plan to increase the basic grant. The PvdD specifies the sum at 475 euros for students living independently from their parents, while BIJ1 prefers to make the height of the grant dependent on the joint income of the student in question and their parents. The temporary increase in the grant for students living independently from their parents should become permanent, D66 believes.
The VVD, one of the parties responsible for abolishing the grant in the past, aims to ‘keep this provision for all students’. The socialists’ (SP) position is that ‘anyone wanting and able should be able to study without incurring a debt’. They want to increase the grant for students, as well as for adults seeking to (re)educate themselves. The subject of retraining is also found in the VVD election programme. According to this party, life-long learning is ‘essential to personal development and economic growth’.
Employment market
According to the VVD, higher education should serve the employment market. A view shared by other parties as well. Moreover, the professional education should be re-evaluated. The PVV’s programme focuses on professional education that trains people for sectors facing shortages of personnel. The party does not want ‘a merger between tertiary professional education and scientific education’. The FvD suggests universities should shrink because ‘universities are meant for a select number of people with exceptional talents, interests and commitment’. A university education for the elite.
CDA focuses on the drop in students opting for health care and engineering. ‘We stimulate schools, parents and prospective students to choose programmes that are in high demand on the employment market.’ A stimulus may be provided by lower tuition fees, for example.
Tuition fees and loans
The VVD wants to lower tuition fees for programmes training people for so-called shortage professions. PvdD prefers to lower tuition fees across the board, while BIJ1 want to abolish them altogether, and D66 wants to offer everyone the chance to pursue a second study at the lower tuition rate. CDA promotes flexible education, a system through which tuition fees are paid per credit. Furthermore, the VVD favours allowing students to follow courses within their programme at different universities.
Volt calls for an interest cap of 2.5 per cent for student loans. BBB in contrast, deems the fact that students pay interest at all “unseeming”. CDA to facilitate graduates in getting rid of their loans.
Added support
The generation of ‘unlucky students’ who studied during the loan system must be compensated, say PvdD, BIJ1, FvD and BBB. D66 wants to limit interest on student loans for this generation, ‘regardless of how long the student studied under the loan system’. Student loans should also not count when applying for a mortgage, according to D66.
Added funds should be made available for students who incur delays due to a disability or serving on a board, says GroenLinks-PvdA. That would increase motivation for students to join co-determination councils, for example. ChristenUnie (CU) is of a similar opinion: students who fall back through no fault of their own deserve financial support.
PvdD wants to make the student public transport product free of charge, including for students who fail to graduate. The FvD want the OV card to be valid all days of the week. D66 wants to expand the OV card to include a subscription to OV bike for weekdays.
Internationalisation
‘Increased numbers of students negatively impact the quality of education’, the PvdD programme states, referring to the increasing influx of international students. This includes a lack of suitable housing and crowded lecture halls. On the contrary, D66 is basically positive about foreign students coming to the Netherlands. ‘Students learn more about others and themselves through international contacts. International students strengthen the knowledge position of the Netherlands.’ Almost all parties have included internationalisation in their programmes, but the suggested solutions vary.
VVD recognises the value of international students, researchers and partnerships. At the same time, the party desires ‘more grip on who comes to the Netherlands to study’. SP wants to safeguard access to ‘study programmes and student housing for youths from the Netherlands’, which means that the influx of international students must be ‘curbed’. FvD agrees.
Volt chooses a more detailed approach where needs per institute are leading. ‘A university such as the one in Maastricht is much more dependent on international students than, for example, Amsterdam or Leiden.’ The party aims to stimulate the exchange of students within Europe.
As was to be expected, PVV has a firmer position in this issue. The party states that internationalisation has ‘severely damaged access to universities for the children of tax-paying Dutch parents’ and goes on to say that ‘universities must primarily serve our children’.
Language
According to the PVV, internationalisation has ‘marginalised Dutch as an academic language’. Hence, bachelor programmes should offer only Dutch-spoken courses and the number of international students admitted to a master’s programme must be capped.
VVD agrees that the bachelor programmes at least must be Dutch-spoken (unless the employment market dictates otherwise’). GroenLinks-PvdA wants English-spoken education only where there is no other option. SP would prefer all programmes to be in Dutch.
D66 is in favor of internationalization, ‘provided it adds quality and is not just a means to boost education funding’. Thus, English may be the language of instruction in the Netherlands, ‘provided it adds value’.
CU welcomes international talent in the Netherlands but does not view our country as ‘a school for every student who wants to come’. Hence, education must be offered in Dutch.
No pay-per-student
Parties also question whether the current system, which pays institutes per (graduated) student, is tenable. According to the CDA the focus should be less on student numbers and more on the institute’s societal duties. FvD and CU also advocate a change in the way education is funded, a system in which student numbers are less dominant. VVD agrees, stating that universities and university colleges should increase their collaboration rather than ‘compete’ for student numbers.
BIJ1 is more concrete. This party wants to abolish the payout per graduate. Moreover, higher education should receive more funding so that they can afford to decline funding from (fossil) industries and retain their independence.
Research funding
‘Research must contribute to the future earning potential of the Netherlands’, says the VVD; this means that the party wants increased research funding for ‘technical, medical and beta research’. A special knowledge agenda is to ensure the generated knowledge makes it to the economy and society.
The SP also wants to invest in scientists and their research. The party wants to safeguard scientific independence. External clients are permitted, but they may not influence the research. A suggested solution is to create a research fund. This idea is welcomed by GroenLinks-PvdA as it will also help assess the societal value of research. Volt’s solution is similar but based on extensive collaborative European projects.
De PvdD places the ball in the government’s court, which should structurally increase its research funding. This would prevent shady funding and professors having multiple affiliations. BBB opts for a two-pronged approach: the party wants the future cabinet to increase its funding in science and partnerships between industry and researchers. D66 wants to promote conversation between scientists and society.
If it were up to the FvD, the private/public Dutch Research Council would be abolished altogether, as universities should be free to decide what they wish to study. The party calls for investments in ‘boundary-pushing, fundamental research.’