Hot-button issues in election manifestos

Based on preliminary manifestos for the upcoming general elections, international students, student financing and protests remain hot-button issues when it comes to higher education, while budget cuts are also still on the agenda.

On 29 October, Dutch voters will go to the polls again. Although many manifestos are not yet available – and those that have been published are still awaiting official approval – it’s clear what issues parties want to talk about in the run-up to the elections.

At this moment, the draft manifestos of VVD, GroenLinks-PvdA, NSC, BBB, PvdD, SP, JA21, PVV, CDA and ChristenUnie are published. These plans may still be subject to minor changes by party members.

Budget cuts

The Schoof government is cutting higher education and research budgets by roughly half a billion euros. Only JA21 and GroenLinks-PvdA state that they want to reverse these cuts. 

While the manifestos of SP, PvdD, VVD, NSC, BBB and ChristenUnie don’t specifically mention this topic, that doesn’t say everything. SP, for example, wants to invest ‘substantially’ in basic and independent research. ‘Not everything has to be immediately applicable or profitable’, the party believes.

Not everything has to be immediately applicable or profitable

SP on basic and independent research

The CDA manifesto includes plans for increased spending on scientific research, but stops short of promising a full reversal of the current government’s cutbacks. Furthermore, the announced investments don’t cover all disciplines. The party focuses primarily on scientific and applied research in ‘key technologies’ such as AI, quantum computing, green chemistry, battery technology and medical technology.

Slow-progress penalty

VVD attracted some attention this summer with its proposal of a ‘quick-progress bonus’ for students who manage to complete their studies within the expected timeframe. This bonus is intended as an incentive for students to stay on track – the opposite of the previously announced ‘slow-progress penalty’. The latter has also made a comeback in VVD’s manifesto, albeit with a twist: the fine – dubbed a ‘delay contribution’ – won’t be paid by the underachieving student, but by their education institution.

BBB is the only party to unequivocally call for a slow-progress penalty, even though the term itself is studiously avoided in its manifesto. The party notes that it wants students with ‘significant’ study delays to pay a ‘fair contribution’ in the form of higher tuition fees.

The idea of a slow-progress penalty was first proposed by the current government (PVV, VVD, NSC and BBB). Students who took more than one additional year to complete their Bachelor’s or Master’s degree would have to pay an extra three thousand euros in tuition fees. Following fierce protests, the government withdrew the plan. While the opposition is likely still opposed to the penalty, SP is currently the only party to explicitly state this in its manifesto. Slow-progress penalties ‘have run their course’, the party writes. 

Study costs

To make studying less expensive, the government can either reduce tuition fees or increase student financing. SP wants to do both. The party intends to do away with tuition fees altogether while increasing the basic student grant. PvdD has similar plans: it wants a higher basic student grant, especially for students living away from home, and a ‘sharp’ reduction in tuition fees. Moreover, it believes that students should always be entitled to free public transport, regardless of how long it takes them to complete their studies. 

GroenLinks-PvdA also promises to increase students’ incomes and argues for a ‘fair basic student grant’. Its manifesto doesn’t mention tuition fees. While NSC wants to keep the basic student grant, it’s also concerned about foreign students applying for student financing in both the Netherlands and their home country. This should be punished with heavy fines, the party believes. 

VVD wants to use tuition fees to influence enrolment numbers for certain programmes, for instance by lowering the costs of programmes in the fields of technology, healthcare, education, security and climate science. Meanwhile, other programmes should be reduced in size: ‘We will limit the number of places available in programmes that offer poor labour market prospects.’

Our education system is intended for the Dutch, and not foreign students who leave after completing their studies

PVV manifesto

CDA, on the other hand, is silent on tuition fees, student financing and other key financial matters for students. However, it does say: ‘As we value academic performance, we propose the introduction of scholarships for outstanding students.’

International students

All of the manifestos published until now touch on the issue of international students, who can expect to face stricter admission requirements. PVV is – not surprisingly – the most radical. ‘PVV wants maximum restrictions on study-related migration to our country’, reads the manifesto. ‘Our education system is intended for the Dutch, and not foreign students who leave after completing their studies.’ Therefore, in Geert Wilders’ view, Bachelor’s programmes should once again be offered exclusively in Dutch. Also, the party proposes sending international students, teachers, administrators and board members who take part in ‘or tolerate’ any violent protest back to their countries of origin.

Other parties are more moderate. NSC, for example, writes that it will ‘curb student migration’, which it proposes to do by raising tuition fees for non-European students. Moreover, the party still wants the vast majority of higher education programmes to be taught in Dutch. Exemptions could be granted to specific Master’s programmes and programmes that struggle to attract enough students. 

VVD is of a similar mind. ‘International talent is important for our knowledge economy’, reads the party’s manifesto, which highlights the importance of ‘students, scientists and knowledge workers in fields where we face pressing shortages, such as STEM and AI’.

BBB wants more Dutch-language instruction and fewer foreign students as well, but the party also recognises the needs of regional education institutions, which may struggle to survive without international enrolments. English should only be used if this is ‘unavoidable’, according to the manifesto. 

In certain regions, international students are essential to keeping academic programmes viable

CDA manifesto

That’s also the way of thinking of CDA, which avoids making any sweeping statements about international students, seeming to imply that things are more nuanced. ‘In certain regions, international students are essential to keeping academic programmes viable, while in others their presence strains social services, housing and student communities.’ As a result, restrictions may be introduced, but not uniformly. CDA also advocates mandatory Dutch language instruction for international students and encourages institutions and employers to use their best efforts to retain and integrate them into the Dutch labour market.

Other parties, such as JA21, SP and ChristenUnie, are critical of internationalisation as a revenue model for higher education institutions, whose funding depends on their enrolment figures – a situation they intend to change. Like NSC and BBB, they also want programmes to be taught in Dutch where possible.

GroenLinks-PvdA also takes a more moderate stance on this issue. While the party does want to ‘get a handle on internationalisation’, it believes that higher education institutions should take the lead. PvdD also wants the government to engage with the sector to address internationalisation and the growing use of English as the main language of instruction. The party is intent on avoiding a situation where ‘internationally oriented programmes’ could face termination.

Funding

Higher education institutions receive funding per student. So, given the fact that enrolment numbers are already declining, how do those calling for a curb on internationalisation plan to prevent cut-throat competition for students? Many parties suggest that education institutions should be funded on a more ‘stable’ basis, with CDA saying this should be less dependent on the number of students. While widely supported in The Hague, the implications of this stance are still unclear.

Amongst others, BBB and NSC are in favour of this as a means to prevent programmes at regional education institutions from disappearing. GroenLinks-PvdA, on the other hand, sees more stable funding as a way to reduce competition between institutions. SP and PvdD want to provide stable funding to support scientific research, with the aim of making researchers less dependent on external backers.

Even VVD, typically a fan of competition, is in favour of a more stable funding system. The party wants to use funding as an instrument to increase the government’s influence on the ‘capacity’ of programmes. In other words, it aims to cap the size of certain programmes by reducing their funding, thus ensuring a better alignment between higher education and the labour market. 

The ChristenUnie also wants ‘a better and fairer system for funding higher education institutions’ and promises that international and overall enrolment numbers will become less important.

Right to protest

There have been many protests and occupations in higher education in recent years. Initially, these mainly focused on the sector’s ties with the fossil fuel industry, but later this shifted to partnerships with Israeli universities. Sometimes they culminated in riots and vandalism. ChristenUnie, BBB and VVD all support a ban on face-covering clothing. So does NSC, provided that exceptions are made for certain protesters, such as Iranian dissidents demonstrating outside their country’s embassy.

Parties such as BBB, VVD and JA21 condemn these disruptions and want rioters to be punished. JA21 even wants higher education to be ‘free of activism’. That is also what PVV wants. Geert Wilders states that education must provide a safe environment for all students and teachers. ‘Individuals involved in violent protests must pay for all the damage caused’, reads the manifesto. In practice, however, recovering those costs often proves difficult.

Although the ChristenUnie warns that the right to protest is under pressure, it also wants to tighten demonstration protocols ‘where necessary’. GroenLinks-PvdA, PvdD and SP oppose all restrictions on the right to protest. 

Amidst mounting global security threats, CDA also supports reinstating the ‘duty to report for military service’ for young people (in other words: conscription). ‘In addition, all young people will begin their further education with introductory training in resilience. Across all programmes, we will introduce a subject to promote awareness and self-reliance in the context of potential wartime scenarios applied to their specific programme.’

This article will be updated when new manifestos will be published.

Also read: