|
Government institutions in The Netherlands.
 Senate
House of Representatives
Government
Council of State
Court of Audit
National Ombudsman
Political Parties
Senate
The 75 members of the Senate (Eerste Kamer) of the Dutch Parliament (the States General) are elected by the members of the twelve Provincial Councils. These elections are indirect: the voters elect the members of the Provincial Councils, who in turn elect the members of the Senate.
As the members of the Senate are not elected directly by the voters, they are rather more remote from the realities of daily politics. They do not, for example, electioneer. The criteria for membership are the same as those for the House of Representatives (Tweede Kamer) of the Dutch Parliament. Since the 1983 revision of the constitution the Senate has been elected in its entirety every four years by the members of the Provincial Council. The elections take place within three months of the Provincial Council elections. Members of the Senate are part-timers who often hold other positions as well.
The Senate's main duties are in the legislative field, but it also plays a role in scrutinising the actions of the Government. Formally the Senate can only reject or accept legislation. Its members do not have the right to amend bills (the right of amendment). They can only vote on them and either accept or reject them. In practice, however, it has rather more possibilities and debates are of importance. For example, statements made by government ministers in debates on bills (draft legislation) can play a role in future lawsuits. The debates in the Senate contribute to the interpretation of a law. Moreover, members of the Senate can elicit undertakings from ministers about the implementation of a law. Like their counterparts in the House of Representatives, members of the Senate are entitled to put written questions to the Government. The debate on the Government's budget also gives them the opportunity to debate current and future policy with the government. However, they make only limited use of this right. The general view is that scrutinising the policy and actions of the Government is first and foremost the responsibility of the House of Representatives.
The Senate has existed since 1815, the year in which it was instituted by King William I. When the Netherlands and Belgium were united in 1815 the Belgians in particular pressed for the introduction of a bicameral system. In its early years the Senate served as a bulwark of the Crown (i.e. the King and his ministers) since it was still able to block bills that displeased the King. Such bills were usually private member's bills from the House of Representatives. At that time, the members of the House of Representatives too were elected indirectly. The members of the Senate were not elected, but were confidants of the King and were appointed for life. The Senate remained in existence after the separation from Belgium in 1830. Much changed in the political sphere as a result of the introduction of a new constitution in 1848. The position of the Senate and the criteria governing eligibility to stand for election were among the changes. Monitoring the quality of legislation gradually came to be the main function of the Senate after 1848. It thus became a revising chamber or 'Chambre de reflection'.
more about the Senate ...
House of Representatives
As in most democracies one of the main tasks of the House of Representatives is to control the government. In a conflict between the government and the House of Representatives, therefore, the House of Representatives has the last word. Another main task of the House of Representatives is to enact legislation and amend existing legislation to changing circumstances, together with the government and the Senate. To fulfill these tasks the House has a number of rights: the right to approve the budget, the right to ask questions, the right of interpellation, the right to submit motions, the right to institute an inquiry, the right of amendment and the right of initiative.
The House of Representatives is authorised to approve the National Budget. The House of Representatives together with the government decides on the level of public sector spending and its goal and purpose. The right to approve the budget allows figures to be raised or lowered, and even for government spending to be scrapped altogether. The budget is subdivided into chapters that present expenditure and revenue by ministry. There are also chapters devoted to other items, for instance the Royal House and the High Bodies of State, like the Council of State, the highest government advisory body, and the parliament itself.
Before the House of Representatives goes on to debate these chapters separately, in the days after 'Princes Day' in September, a debate called the General Political Review takes place on the proposed policy. This is the most important annual confrontation between the government and parliament. Practically all members of the House of Representatives, all ministers and deputy ministers are in the Tweede Kamer at that time.
The Financial Reviews ensue several weeks later when the House of Representatives debates the budget of the ministry of Finance and specifically looks at the details of the financial aspects of policy. In the subsequent weeks the House of Representatives goes on to debate the National Budget, chapter by chapter and ministry by ministry. The House of Representatives endeavours to have this business completed before the start of the new year. The Senate discusses the National Budget afterwards, but has no right to change it.Every year on the third Wednesday in May, is the Day of Account. The minister of Finance presents the annual reports from all the ministries to the House of Representatives. They give an account of the results of the policy presented on 'Princes Day'. In addition, the Auditor General presents an analysis of these annual reports. They indicate whether the financial resources for implementation of the policy were used legitimately and efficiently. During the subsequent weeks the House of Representatives discusses the annual reports.
Every individual member of the House of Representatives has the constitutional right to put questions to a minister or state secretary. This can be done in writing or orally. There is an opportunity to pose oral questions every Tuesday during Question Time, at the beginning of the House's business at 14.00 hours (televised live). After the minister has replied in the first instance, and the questioner has gone on to ask further questions in the second instance (either of the minister or other members) other members of the House may also ask each other questions. The minister is obliged to answer questions from members. Written questions may be submitted at any given moment. After the President of the House of Representatives has approved them, he or she passes them on to the members of the government in question (minister and/or state secretary). A written reply should be received to these questions within three weeks.
There is another way in which members of the House of Representatives can ask for information from ministers or deputy ministers and this is by means of interpellation. Interpellation differs in a number of respects to questions in the House. This is an opportunity for a debate in which all parties represented in Parliament can participate. An interpellation provides an opportunity to put forward all kinds of points of criticism of government policy.It also provides an opportunity, unlike the right to ask questions, of submitting one or more motions.
If a member of the House disagrees with a certain part of government policy, or if he thinks that the government ought to be taking action in a certain field, he can express this by tabling a motion. A motion obliges the House of Representatives to make a statement on the issue. The House only votes on a motion if it is supported by at least four other members. But usually that is no problem. The unwritten rule is that every parliamentary party must have the opportunity of tabling a motion. The government or the minister indicates whether and how the motion will be implemented, but there is no legal obligation to do so. That may lead to a crisis of confidence between the House of Representatives and minister or even the entire government.If the House of Representatives tables a motion of no confidence this irrevocably leads to a ministerial or government crisis.
Members of the House are entitled to submit bills on their own initiative and to defend these in the House and afterwards in the Senate.
It has frequently happened in recent years that members of the House have availed themselves of this right, although they are more likely to request the government to submit a particular bill.
The House of Representatives makes frequent use of the right to amend draft legislation. The minister may adopt the amendment, leave it to the judgement of the House of Representatives, advise against it, or even declare it to be unacceptable. If the House decides, nevertheless, to adopt the amendment in the latter case, the minister may decide to withdraw the proposed legislation. If it is of great importance to the minister to maintain the legislative proposal in its original form, he or she may threaten to resign, which could result in a government crisis.
More about the House of Representatives ...
Government
Government comprises over 1,600 organisations and bodies, including 13 ministries, 12 provincial authorities and, since 1 January 2005, 467 municipal authorities. It also includes autonomous administrative authorities, such as police regions and chambers of commerce, and public bodies for industry and the professions. At the same time, many organisations that we might assume form part of government are in private hands. They include health insurance funds, boards of private schools and benefit agencies.
Within the government sector, we distinguish between bodies that are directly elected and those that are not. Municipal councils, water boards and the House of Representatives are directly elected by the people, whereas mayors, police commissioners and ministers are not. However, all government authorities are ultimately accountable to the public for what they do. There are three tiers of government: central, provincial and municipal. Other authorities are classified mainly on the basis of their tasks.
Central Government:
Central government is concentrated in and around The Hague. The parliament buildings in the city centre are the nerve-centre of Dutch political life. The upper and lower houses of parliament (known officially as the States General, or the Senate and House of Representatives) face each other across a historic courtyard called the Binnenhof. Between them stands the medieval Knights' Hall (Ridderzaal), scene of the State Opening of Parliament (Prinsjesdag) when the Queen delivers the annual speech setting out the government's legislative plans for the coming parliamentary year. The Prime Minister has his offices in a turret (Torentje) looking out onto the lake (Hofvijver), while the weekly cabinet meetings are held in the Treveszaal.
The directly elected House of Representatives and indirectly elected Senate together constitute the legislative assembly or parliament.
All Dutch nationals aged 18 or over are eligible both to vote in elections to the House of Representatives and to stand for election. Voting takes place using either ballot papers or voting machines. The 150 seats in the House are allocated on the basis of an 'electoral quota': the total number of votes cast divided by the number of seats available (150). The number of votes cast for each party is divided by the electoral quota and the result determines the number of seats initially allocated to that party. But there are always a few votes left over and therefore a few remaining seats to be allocated. These are allocated using a different formula which tends to favour the major parties. However, relatively like-minded parties may choose to link their lists in order to obtain more of the remaining seats. This does not mean that the parties will necessarily cooperate once they are in parliament. Smaller parties often link their lists.
The process of forming a new coalition government begins on the day after the general election. The Queen asks the leaders of the parliamentary parties and a series of advisers whom she can best invite to form a new government, given the outcome of the election. It may be quite clear which combination of parties will have the majority of seats in the newly elected House of Representatives. Two or more parties may have announced their intention to form a coalition in the run-up to the election and have gained a majority on that basis. Generally, however, the formation of a government is an extremely complex business that takes many weeks.
If it looks like things are going to be fairly straightforward, the Queen may immediately appoint a formateur (usually the future Prime Minister) to negotiate the formation of the new government. But in most cases she will first appoint a senior political figure (the informateur) to find out which parties are willing to form a coalition and what problems need to be overcome. In practice, the party that has won the most votes will take the lead in forming a coalition and will usually provide the formateur or informateur. The aim is a coalition government that has the support of a majority of members of the House of Representatives and has reached prior agreement on its main policies. The process of forming a coalition is complete once the formateur has gained the agreement of the parties concerned to both a written coalition agreement and a list of candidate ministers. The ministers are then sworn in and the Prime Minister makes a formal policy statement to the House of Representatives.
The present governmenthas sixteen ministers, each with their own tasks. Since government policy is a shared responsibility, all major decisions have to be taken at the weekly meetings of the Cabinet, when the Prime Minister has the important task of maintaining government unity. Many of the ministers are assisted by state secretaries, who are responsible for part of the ministerial portfolio. A state secretary is a kind of junior minister. Although not members of the Cabinet, they attend Cabinet meetings if topics within their remit are on the agenda.
Links to the government:
- Ministry of General Affairs
- Ministry of Foreign Affairs
- Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations
- Ministry of Defence
- Ministry of Economic Affairs
- Ministry of Finance
- Ministry of Justice
- Ministry of Agriculture, nature management and fisheries
- Ministy of Education, Culture and Science
- Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management
- Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport
- Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment
Provinces:
The Netherlands is divided into twelve provinces. They form the tier of administration between central government and the municipalities. Provinces do the work for which central government is 'too big' and the municipalities 'too small'. Very many of their activities impact directly or indirectly on everyday life: for example, they decide whether individual hospitals remain open or merge with other health care institutions, whether alternative forms of public transport are developed, how youth social services are delivered, where cycle paths are constructed, etc. Provinces seldom work alone. Often, they merely 'direct operations', working in close collaboration with other government bodies (central government, municipalities and water boards) and with organisations and institutions in the public and private sector. Provincial councils have responsibilities in many fields: land-use planning, transport, the economy, agriculture, environmental management, recreation, wildlife and countryside, social work, culture, local government organisation and overseeing the work of the water boards and the financial affairs of the municipalities.
Municipalities:
Residents contacts with the municipality (gemeente) are likely to be many and various. Every four years when elections are held for the municipal council, each week when refuse is collected, and whenever someone needs to obtain a building permit for a roof extension, to renew a Dutch passport or driving licence, or to register the birth of a child. Municipalities form the lowest tier of government in the Netherlands, after central government and the provinces. There are 467 of them (1 January 2005). They all apply national legislation on matters like social security benefits in the same way and they all issue identical Dutch passports. But there are also major differences between them. Large, densely populated cities have different problems to sparsely populated rural areas, and the policies of the municipalities reflect these differences.Civil servants, councillors and the municipal executive are all responsible for ensuring that things run smoothly in their area.
Local preferences also differ. Where people in one municipality may give priority to the extension of a theatre, residents in another may prefer to spend the money on improving run-down neighbourhoods. Making such choices is the main task of the municipality. Residents can have a direct influence on the decisions it takes - by voting in the municipal council elections and by expressing opinions at other times too.
Municipalities derive more than 90 per cent of their income from central government. Some of it comes from the Municipalities Fund, supplied by central government from tax revenue and divided between the municipalities. The municipalities are free to use this money as they see fit. They also receive grants for specific purposes, like public transport or youth social work. How much they get depends on population and local circumstances. Municipalities also have the power to levy taxes. Property taxes on residential and business premises are the main source of independent income. Other sources are tourist tax, dog licence fees and parking charges. Each municipal council sets these charges as well as charges for services like the provision of legal documents and refuse collection.
One of the municipalities' main responsibilities is to maintain the housing stock. To provide for the construction of new residential areas and to control development in existing urban areas and in the countryside, municipalities produce structure and development plans. The latter are especially important to local residents since they specify the uses to which land may be put. The development plan will determine whether you can build a garden shed or start a small business in your home.
The municipality is also responsible for the roads and road safety. The municipal council produces plans to relieve congestion and decides on the location of new roads, car parks, traffic calming measures, pedestrian underpasses and cycle paths. Thanks to the Environmental Management Act, the municipality is able to control environmental nuisance. Businesses causing pollution can be excluded from residential areas and action can be taken against people who dump large items of household refuse or cause emissions of hazardous substances. In education, too, the municipality has a wide range of responsibilities. The municipal council acts as the school board for the publicly-run schools in its area and is responsible for ensuring privately-run schools have suitable premises. School attendance officers work for the municipality. The remit of the municipality is now expanding to include activities in health care, social work, culture, sport and recreation. The municipal council is now responsible for deciding on after-school care and the management of arts centres and sports facilities, for instance.
In recent years, many central government powers and responsibilities have devolved to the municipalities. The idea is for municipalities to have more freedom and shoulder more responsibility. Government ministries in The Hague used to allocate grants to local institutions. Now it is up to the municipalities to do so. But there are areas in which the municipalities have no say. They are not permitted to have their own foreign or defence policies, for instance.
More about the Government...
Council of State
The Council of State advises the Dutch government and parliament on legislation and governance and is the country’s highest administrative court. The basis for its responsibilities can be found in articles 73, 74 and 75 of the Constitution. Like the House of Representatives and the Senate, which together form the States General (Parliament), the Netherlands Court of Audit and the National Ombudsman, the Council is one of the High Councils of State. These are bodies regulated by the Constitution, each with its own specific task, which it carries out independently of the government. The Administrative Jurisdiction Division is the highest administrative court in the Netherlands. It hears appeals lodged by members of the public against decisions or orders given by municipal, provincial or central government.
Her Majesty the Queen is the President of the Council of State. The Council consists of the Vice-President, who is effectively in charge, and a maximum of 28 members, known as State Councillors. State Councillors are appointed for life by the Queen, by Royal Decree, on the nomination of the cabinet and the recommendation of the Council. They are chosen on the basis of their expertise and experience in legislative, administrative or judicial matters. They represent a cross-section of political and social opinion in the Netherlands, and are drawn from the ranks of politicians, top officials, judges and academics. There are also up to 50 Extraordinary Councillors, who are normally involved only in the Council’s judicial activities. The Councillors meet in the Plenary Council every Wednesday to consider their recommendations on legislation. The Council of State for the Kingdom, which contains two extra members representing the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba, meets once a month. The Council has a Secretary who is responsible for its civil service staff.
The Council of State provides the government with independent advice on: bills introduced in Parliament by the government, international agreements which the government puts before Parliament for approval, orders in council before they are promulgated by the Crown and other matters on which the government seeks the Council’s advice. The House of Representatives also seeks the Council’s advice on bills introduced by one or more members of parliament before considering them in the House.
At the end of the advisory opinion, the Council gives its judgment (the dictum). This may be negative in that it recommends against introducing the bill or promulgating the order in council, or it may recommend waiting until far-reaching amendments have been made. If the Council’s opinion is negative, the proposed legislation is returned to the cabinet. Once the Council has issued its opinion, the relevant minister presents a report (nader rapport) to the Queen, containing amendments to the bill and proposing that it should or should not be submitted to the House of Representatives. The Council of State’s opinion is made public when a bill is introduced into the House.
Court of Audit
The Netherlands Court of Audit is a `High Council of State', along with the Upper and Lower Houses, the Council of State and the National Ombudsman. High Councils of State are central government bodies created in order to ensure that the democratic system works properly. The Court investigates whether Dutch public funds are collected and spent regularly and effectively. It is independent of the government and Parliament, deciding for itself what to audit, how to do so, and what to publish. The Board of the Netherlands Court of Audit comprises three members, one of whom holds the post of President.
The Netherlands Court of Audit aims to audit and improve the regularity, efficiency, effectiveness and integrity with which the State and associated bodies operate. It also audits compliance with the Netherlands' obligations under international agreements. As part of this process, it passes on the results of its audits, as well as its accumulated experience, to the government, parliament and those responsible for the bodies audited. This information is, as a rule, also available to the public. It consists of audit findings, opinions and recommendations concerning organisation, management and policy. Another task of the Netherlands Court of Audit is to contribute to sound public administration through cooperation and knowledge exchange at home and abroad. The Netherlands Court of Audit sees quality, reliability and utility as the hallmarks of its work, and independence, efficiency and effectiveness as the hallmarks of its working methods. It strives to be a transparent organisation, continually investing in the quality of its staff and procedures.
Every five years the Netherlands Court of Audit formulates a strategy to put its mission into practice in the coming years. Its strategy for 2004-2009 is described in the brochure 'Effective and transparent, performance and operation of public administration', which was published on 31 March 2004. On the same date the Court also published its Report for 2003 and its Work Programme for 2004. In its mission statement, the Court set itself the objective of investigating and improving the regularity, efficiency, effectiveness and integrity of central government and the institutions associated with it. It does so by providing the House of Representatives and the government with information based on its audits with a view to contributing to government decisiveness and transparency. These aims are worked out in the Strategy for 2004-2009.
Unlike other government bodies the Netherlands Court of Audit is independent of government: their legal status, duties and powers are laid down by law. Like the Lower House, the Court of Audit is responsible for checking government policy, but the difference is that the Court only gives its opinion after a policy has been laid down. Nor does the Court make political pronouncements: it will never say, for example, that a particular law is "no good", although it may say that a law is not working the way it was intended. As an independent body the Court is detached from the day-to-day workings of politics and can thus examine all sorts of topics `at its leisure'. This does not mean that we shut ourselves up in an ivory tower: we are always aware of the fact that our findings must be capable of practical application. As far as this is concerned the Court regards the government and the Lower House as its principal `customers'. We try to gear our audits to the needs and wishes of Members of Parliament as far as possible: we see it as being our job to provide Parliament with compact, relevant information so that it can decide quickly whether a Minister is on the right track. If Members of Parliament or Ministers need an independent expert opinion on a particular subject they can ask us to research it. They cannot order the Court to do so, however, as it decides for itself what to investigate. Parliament frequently initiates a debate with a Minister as a result of an audit by the Court. This can result in better information being made available on the situation in a particular policy sector, or in the policy itself being improved. The Court's audits can thus have political effects even though the Court does not itself play a direct political role.
The Court investigates whether Dutch public funds are collected and spent regularly and effectively. It is independent of the government and Parliament, deciding for itself what to audit, how to do so, and what to publish. It has traditionally been the Court's job to check whether the money coming into each Ministry (taxes, contributions etc.) has been collected in accordance with the rules and whether the outgoing money has been spent on the things it was earmarked for in the budget. When auditing we check not only the figures but also the administrative organisation behind them (whether the Ministries' financial management comes up to scratch), based on audits by other bodies such as the Ministries' audit departments and other supervisory bodies-always checking first whether these audits are of high enough quality. Once central government's accounts are in order (regular), the next question is whether the money is being used to good effect. The Court has been paying more and more attention to questions of this kind in recent years. It has the power to carry out audits in all areas of government responsibility and the right of access to all files held by Ministries, and other bodies in some cases. With such a large field of operation we have to be selective, as there is not enough time to examine everything. Measures which have effects felt directly by the general public are the principal area we cover at present, viz. policy on law and order, income, health care, education, housing and the environment. Primary facilities are at stake in these sectors: if the government blunders here the effects on ordinary people can be serious. The Court presents its findings in the form of `dry' facts and figures, sometimes drawing critical conclusions on the effects of government policy and making recommendations for improvement. We do not advise the government on policy, however: our work does not begin until after the government has made a decision. Auditing thus takes place after the event. Often, however, we do try to point out at an early stage what concrete effects a government decision could have. The Court does not itself have any legal power, in that it cannot take steps to change a policy itself; it has to rely on its authority. Consequently it must always set about its work with thoroughness, care and reliability. It must also devote a good deal of attention to how it formulates its opinions: it must make the problems it reports as transparent as possible to the government and parliament.
National Ombudsman
The institution of National Ombudsman is established in order to give individuals an opportunity to place complaints about the practices of government before an independent and expert body. The mechanism works alongside existing provision, such as Parliament, the courts, and internal complaints procedures. Applying to the Ombudsman may result in steps being taken in particular cases (perhaps contrary to the authority’s original intention), and, in a broader context, help to restore public confidence in government. In view of this role vis-à-vis the individual, the National Ombudsman Act deliberately elects to make a single person, the National Ombudsman, represent the institution in the eyes of the outside world, as a counterbalance to an often faceless bureaucracy.
The National Ombudsman can also contribute to the quality of government, by providing feedback as to how the authorities are performing their tasks. This is important for government organisations that want to do their work in a customer-friendly way and therefore attach great importance to high-quality policy implementation. Complaints are signals, constituting a valuable source of information for quality assurance. Observing the proper conduct criteria applied by the National Ombudsman can, in short, contribute to the rationality and legitimacy of public administration.
For the National Ombudsman to fulfil his role, he must be visible to the public, which must have confidence in his impartiality and methods. Where the government is concerned, it is important to note that the National Ombudsman’s decisions are not legally enforceable. Respect for the authority of the National Ombudsman and his decisions is therefore of particular importance, if they are to have any impact at all. That authority is determined in the first instance by the quality of the work itself: a brisk and thorough investigation, well-reasoned decisions, and readable reports. High-quality work is a sine qua non, but not sufficient in itself. It is the internal mainstay, but the external one is also vital: political support for the National Ombudsman and public awareness of his work.
Political Parties
CDA (Christian Democratic Alliance)
PvdA (Dutch Labour Party)
VVD (People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy)
SP (Socialist Party)
D66 (Democrats 66)
LPF (Pim Fortuyn List)
GL (Green Left Alliance)
CU (ChristianUnion)
SGP (Calvinist Political Party)
The organization of political activity and social life in The Netherlands began to change remarkablely in the 1960s. Until then, most facets of Dutch life were organized systematically in what are called pillars, or groups. In education, politics, the communications media, medicine, the trade unions, and other portions of Dutch life, institutions were specifically Protestant, Roman Catholic, or public (nondenominational) and were described on committees at all levels of government. As the nation underwent change, socialist and liberal nonsectarian pillars joined the denominational pillars, and some institutions became independent of the pillar system. By the 1980s most people had become less firmly attached to a specific pillar.
|
