Last month, Progress published an article on the upcoming elections in the Netherlands which described the upsurge in support for the Dutch Labour party (PvdA) following the nomination of its new leader Job Cohen. Within a week, the ‘Cohen-effect’ catapulted the PvdA up from 26 to 33 seats in the polls and the party maintained its lead position throughout the early stage of the campaign. With two televised leaders’ debates completed and only one week to go to election day, this positive trend is declining with a four seat loss and a widening gap with the latest number one, the Liberal Party (VVD).
Cohen performed more poorly than expected in the debates, which is currently taking its toll in the polling rates. Although it must be noted that the PvdA’s position – with double the seats in the current polls compared to last February – is still far from miserable, two developments in particular are thwarting its glorious course to becoming number one against all odds. Firstly, when Cohen entered the election arena, Geert Wilders’ anti-immigrant Freedom Party was set to become one of the biggest parties. During his time as mayor of multicultural Amsterdam, Cohen became known for his ability to build bridges and gather support among the public. This made him the very best candidate to counter Wilders’ polarising politics, who scornfully described Cohen as a ‘teadrinking multiculti-hugger’.
However, as the campaign progressed, the issue of immigration receded to the background and the economy took over. Wilders’ proposals to save €21 billion, by imposing a headscarf tax and cutting spending on anything to do with immigration, Europe, and development aid did not exactly woo the public and the Freedom party has by now sunk to the fourth spot. Although this can only be welcomed by anyone who holds the once famous Dutch tolerance dear, it offers Cohen less opportunities to speak passionately and convincingly about realising the plural, tolerant society he envisions.
Furthermore, the almost exclusive focus of the campaign on the impending spending cuts is proving tough for the Labour party, particularly considering its closest opponent, the conservative VVD, has a strong reputation in this field and its leader’s steady performance in the debates has put the party on a seemingly secure path to the number one position. The situation is aggravated by several changes the PvdA has made to its manifesto in recent weeks, after the independent Dutch Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis (CPB) assessed and published the likely economic impact of each party’s policy proposals, which is always an important moment in the campaign. To change proposals post-publication of CPB calculations is to overstep an important rule of the game, and all parties from left to right have been quick to draw Labour’s credibility into question and to cast doubt on the party’s ability to lead on economic affairs.
Yet, as became clear in the recent UK election results, opinion polls only tell part of the story and it is usually not the concluding part. Cohen is a well respected figure and his sincerity goes largely unchallenged. He might not be a champion in what he calls ‘student-debating-club-style discussions’, but this may even be considered an asset by those who loathe the ‘celebritisation’ of politics. More importantly, in a country where coalition governments of three to four parties are the norm, strategic voting is common. With the conservative VVD as the largest in the polls openly embracing the possibility of forming an all right coalition with the Christian Democrats and Wilders’ Freedom party, many Dutch voters might well opt for the left on polling day in an attempt to prevent this and increase the possibility of a more mixed and moderate coalition. If ‘Clegg-mania’ did not materialise in the UK, the ‘Cohen-effect’ in the Netherlands might equally prove more lasting than the polls currently indicate.