A New Government in the Netherlands Takes a Strong Stand Against Unchecked Immigration

FAIR Take | May 2024

In the Netherlands, pretty much anything goes. But in this country, the heart of progressive Europe, voters have decided that the unchecked influx of “asylum seekers” has gone too far.

Much like voters in the United States, where polls show that immigration tops the list of concerns, the impact of sustained mass immigration was on the minds of Dutch voters when they went to the polls last November. During the year leading up to the election, the number of asylum seekers arriving in the Netherlands more than doubled from just under 100,000 in 2021 to more than 218,000 in 2022. As in the United States, the influx of new migrants strained social services, the availability of affordable housing and raised concerns about public safety.

In that multiparty democracy, parties calling for strict curbs on migration captured a parliamentary majority. Last week, after months of wrangling, there was an agreement on the formation of a new government. Geert Wilders, the most prominent political figure urging restraint on immigration, will not serve as prime minister, but the policies for which he has advocated for two decades will be a centerpiece of the new governing coalition. It was not immediately announced who will fill the role of prime minister.

The terms of the new coalition were announced in a 26-page document that encompasses ten key points.  These points, all based on immigration, focus on deporting denied asylum seekers and strengthening integration requirements.  The leaders of the four coalition partners committed to instituting “the strictest asylum policy ever,” and indicated that they are prepared to explore the possibility of withdrawing from the European Union’s migration compact. Two other EU members, Poland and Hungary, have expressed similar interests, while unchecked migration was a key factor in the decision of British voters to withdraw from the EU altogether.

The new government indicated that its goal is not just to halt the influx of new asylum seekers, but to reverse the trend. The soft approach to achieving this objective is to persuade asylum seekers without legitimate claims to leave on their own. Under the new government’s plan, migrants will no longer be given priority for public housing, and those who have not been granted asylum or refuge status will be ineligible to bring family members to live with them in the Netherlands. For those who can’t be persuaded to leave, the coalition’s plan calls for “deport[ing] people without a valid residence permit as much as possible, even forcibly.”

The Netherlands is not an outlier in Europe or among other Western democracies. But the fact voters in one of the most progressive nations on earth have so resoundingly rejected unchecked migration should send a clear message to leaders in other countries, including our own. There is a limit to the fiscal burdens and social upheaval citizens will bear.

The mounting costs of unchecked illegal immigration were recently the subject of a hearing by the House Budget Committee, at which FAIR’s research was featured prominently. Testifying before the Committee, FAIR’s executive director, Julie Kirchner, explained that the already hefty price tag of $151 billion annually is likely to grow significantly in coming years because of both increasing numbers of illegal aliens and the Biden administration’s flagrant abuse of parole authority. Within five years, parolees become eligible for a wide and expensive range of federal benefits. And, much as in the Netherlands, citizens in high impact areas like New York and Chicago are protesting the diversion of resources from their own needs to meet the needs of illegal aliens.

The lessons of the voter revolt against unpopular mass migration policies in the Netherlands do not necessarily mean that such a rapid shift in policy can be replicated here. But this new government, in one of the most progressive nations in the world, is one more warning sign to political leaders in other Western nations that they can no longer assume that voters will accept the status quo.