'Aan de slag': The Netherlands' Most Audacious Political Experiment Gets a Title and a Prayer

At precisely 13:00 on a grey Friday afternoon in The Hague, Rob Jetten, Dilan Yeşilgöz, and Henri Bontenbal stepped before the cameras in Nieuwspoort (the Dutch parliament's press centre) to unveil what they have been calling, with straight faces, "a beautiful, coherent story." The coalition agreement bears the title 'Aan de slag', literally "Get to Work", which is either admirably unpretentious or a tacit admission that the hard part hasn't even started yet. Given that the three parties command a combined 66 seats in a 150-seat parliament, the latter interpretation seems more accurate.

The document runs to 67 pages, covering everything from defence spending to dairy farming, from migration policy to pensions. It contains €19 billion for defence, €20 billion for a nitrogen fund, sweeping reforms to healthcare and social security, and an apparently ironclad commitment to preserving the hypotheekrenteaftrek (mortgage interest deduction, a controversial tax benefit for homeowners that economists blame for inflating house prices). It is, in other words, a comprehensive vision for the Netherlands over the next four years. There is just one small problem: none of it can happen without the cooperation of parties who weren't invited to write it.

Welcome to Dutch politics in 2026, where the government presents plans it cannot implement, the opposition criticises proposals it might eventually support, and everyone pretends this is how democracy is supposed to work.

The Art of Writing a Coalition Agreement Nobody Can Enforce

Let us begin with the basics. D66 (Democrats 66, a progressive liberal party) holds 26 seats, the VVD (People's Party for Freedom and Democracy, a conservative-liberal party) has 22, and the CDA (Christian Democratic Appeal, a centrist Christian-democratic party) contributes 18. Together, they fall 10 seats short of a majority in the Tweede Kamer (House of Representatives) and face an even steeper deficit in the Eerste Kamer (Senate), where they control just 34 of 75 seats. This is not, as the three leaders keep insisting, merely a challenge to be overcome through dialogue and cooperation. It is a fundamental structural reality that renders every promise in their agreement provisional.

The document itself acknowledges this reality with unusual candour. "We know no tradition of minority governments in the Netherlands," the three leaders write in their introduction. "In that sense, we find ourselves on uncharted territory." They go on to cite Denmark as a model, a country with a long history of minority governments. What they do not mention is that Danish minority governments typically operate within a political culture of consensus-building that the Netherlands has spent the past decade systematically dismantling. Importing Danish governance without Danish political culture is rather like importing IKEA furniture without the Allen key.

Yeşilgöz's claim that the agreement bears a "clear VVD stamp" is telling. So is the fact that both D66 and CDA made similar claims about their own influence. Either the three parties have achieved some sort of quantum superposition in which the document simultaneously reflects three distinct political philosophies, or everyone is engaged in the time-honoured tradition of selling the same product to different audiences. The hypotheekrenteaftrek stays (for VVD voters). Climate investment continues (for D66 voters). The nitrogen fund gets €20 billion (for CDA's agricultural base). Everyone wins, at least on paper.

The Money: A Deep Dive into the Budgetary Tables

The financial architecture of 'Aan de slag' is a masterclass in political alchemy, the art of making difficult trade-offs appear painless. The budgettaire bijlage (budgetary annex), running to twelve dense pages of tables and explanatory notes, reveals just how ambitious (some might say delusional) the coalition's fiscal plans truly are.

Defence: The Centrepiece

The headline investment is defence. The coalition commits to reaching 2.8% of GDP by 2030 and 3.5% by 2035, figures that would have seemed fantastical just five years ago. The budgetary table tells the story: €0 in 2026 (the current budget cycle is already set), €2.1 billion in 2027, €4.5 billion in 2028, €7.1 billion in 2029, €9.5 billion in 2030, and a staggering €19.3 billion structurally thereafter. These are not small numbers. They represent a fundamental reorientation of Dutch fiscal priorities.

Ukraine support continues at substantial levels: €3 billion annually in military assistance through 2029, plus €419 million in non-military support. The agreement explicitly states that Ukraine spending counts toward the NATO percentage, a convenient accounting trick that helps the numbers look more impressive while acknowledging that supporting Kyiv is not the same as building domestic military capacity.

Healthcare: The Bitter Medicine

The healthcare chapter of the budgetary annex reads like a catalogue of pain for patients and providers alike. The coalition has decided that the Dutch healthcare system, one of the most expensive in Europe, requires significant restructuring. Their solution involves making patients pay more and providers accept less.

The eigen risico (healthcare deductible, the amount patients must pay out-of-pocket before insurance coverage kicks in) is the most visible change. The coalition will not implement the previously planned reduction; instead, they will allow it to rise with inflation from €385 to approximately €400 in 2027. On top of that, they add another €60, bringing the total to around €460. The budgetary impact is substantial: not lowering the deductible saves €3.7 billion in 2027, rising to €4.8 billion structurally. The additional €60 increase generates another €1 billion annually.

There is a small consolation: the introduction of "tranchering" (capping) at €150 per treatment in specialist care from 2028. This means patients won't pay more than €150 of their deductible for any single treatment. The measure costs €200 million annually but provides meaningful protection for those with multiple chronic conditions.

To soften the blow, the coalition allocates €350 million structurally for compensation for healthcare costs for the chronically ill. The money goes to municipalities, who will decide how to distribute it. Given the history of municipal discretion in social policy, this is likely to result in significant regional variation in who receives support and how much.

Social Security: The Great Unravelling

Fortuin was not exaggerating. The social security reforms are extensive and, for many workers, will be painful.

The WW (Werkloosheidswet, Unemployment Insurance Act) duration is cut from 24 months to 12 months effective January 2028. This is actually more severe than the previous government's plan to cut it to 18 months. To partially compensate, the benefit level in the first two months rises from 75% to 80% of previous salary from 2030. The eligibility requirements also tighten: workers will need to have worked 42 of the previous 52 weeks (up from the current requirement), and benefit rights will accumulate at half a month per year worked instead of the current system.

The WIA (Wet werk en inkomen naar arbeidsvermogen, Work and Income According to Labour Capacity Act) faces even more dramatic changes. The IVA (Inkomensvoorziening Volledig Arbeidsongeschikten, Income Provision for Fully Disabled Persons) category is abolished for new claimants from 2030. Currently, those assessed as permanently unable to work receive a higher, more stable benefit. Under the new system, everyone will receive the WGA (Return to Work Partially Disabled) benefit with regular reassessments.

Measure	2027	2028	2029	2030	Structural
WW duration cut to 12 months	+€5m	-€526m	-€991m	-€1,320m	TBD
IVA abolition	+€6m	+€12m	+€13m	-€53m	-€1,151m
Lower maximum daily wage (20%)	-	-	+€10m	-€644m	-€813m
AOW 1:1 life expectancy link	-	-	-	-	-€2,772m

Note: Negative numbers represent savings/deficit reduction. Source: Budgetary Annex to Coalition Agreement.

The AOW (Algemene Ouderdomswet, General Old Age Pensions Act, the Dutch state pension) change is perhaps the most consequential for younger workers. Currently, the retirement age rises by 8 months for every year that life expectancy increases (a two-thirds ratio). From 2033, this becomes a 1:1 relationship. If life expectancy rises by one year, the retirement age rises by one year. The structural savings are enormous: €2.77 billion annually. But today's thirty-somethings may find themselves working until 70 or beyond.

The Nitrogen Gambit: €20 Billion and Counting

No issue better illustrates the dysfunction of Dutch politics over the past five years than stikstof (nitrogen) policy. The crisis, triggered by a 2019 court ruling that found Dutch emissions policies inadequate under EU nature protection law, has frozen construction projects, enraged farmers, and consumed multiple ministers. The previous governments tried various approaches, from voluntary buyouts to mandatory reductions, and succeeded mainly in uniting everyone in opposition.

The new coalition's answer is money. Lots of it. The stikstoffonds (nitrogen fund) is restored with €20 billion through 2035, distributed across multiple intervention types: €2.75 billion for voluntary farm buyouts, €9 billion for area-based approaches around vulnerable nature areas, €2 billion for management measures and innovation, €2.2 billion for nature restoration, €1.2 billion for agrarisch natuurbeheer (agricultural nature management, paying farmers to maintain nature-friendly practices), €1.25 billion for water quality improvements, and €1.35 billion for flanking measures including support for young farmers.

The policy framework introduces sector-specific reduction targets written into law: 42-46% NH₃ reduction for agriculture by 2035 (with a "stretch target" of 23-25% by 2030), 50% NH₃ for industry, and 50% NOₓ for mobility. Around the most vulnerable Natura 2000 areas, zones will be established where farmers must either innovate, extensify (reduce intensity), relocate, or exit. The language is carefully calibrated to avoid the word "mandatory" while describing what are, in effect, mandatory changes.

This is where the minority government's structural weakness becomes most apparent. GroenLinks-PvdA (a merger of the Green Left and Labour parties), which holds the key to many potential majorities, has consistently demanded more ambitious nitrogen reductions. The BBB (BoerBurgerBeweging, Farmer-Citizen Movement), which represents agricultural interests, wants exactly the opposite. The agreement tries to thread this needle by promising "perspective" for farmers while maintaining legal commitments. It is a formula designed to keep everyone talking and no one satisfied.

Housing: Bold Targets, Familiar Obstacles

The Netherlands needs to build approximately 100,000 new homes per year to address its housing shortage (woningnood). It has not come close to this figure in recent years, largely because the nitrogen crisis has blocked construction permits, municipalities lack the capacity to process applications, and the economics of housing development have become increasingly unfavourable.

The budgetary commitment is real: €1 billion annually from 2029 through 2035 for affordable housing construction, plus €1.1 billion annually from 2031-2035 for infrastructure to support new housing developments. Woningcorporaties (housing corporations, non-profit organisations that own and manage social housing) get tax relief worth €250-325 million annually to boost their investment capacity. The coalition also promises to build "at least 30 large-scale new construction locations of national importance," which could mean new neighbourhoods or even new cities.

Most telling is the decision to preserve the hypotheekrenteaftrek. D66 and CDA campaigned on phasing out this tax benefit, which primarily advantages existing homeowners and has been blamed by economists for inflating house prices. The VVD called its preservation a "breaking point." Guess who won? The result is a housing policy that promises to build more affordable homes while maintaining a tax structure that makes homes less affordable. It is, to borrow a phrase, a beautiful, coherent story.

The Opposition's Dilemma: Cooperate or Obstruct?

For GroenLinks-PvdA, the largest opposition party with 20 seats in the Tweede Kamer and 14 in the Eerste Kamer, the coalition agreement presents an uncomfortable choice. Jesse Klaver has promised "verantwoordelijke oppositie" (responsible opposition) and expressed willingness to negotiate "big progressive breakthroughs" before the summer. But the agreement contains precisely the kind of welfare state retrenchment he has warned against.

The warning is clear: GroenLinks-PvdA is willing to deal, but not to be taken for granted. On specific topics, Klaver says his party will still negotiate "snoeihard" (extremely tough) with the incoming government.

The result is likely to be a kind of permanent negotiation, where every piece of legislation becomes a separate deal with its own winners and losers. Informateur Rianne Letschert, in her parting advice to the coalition, reportedly told them to "buy a good coffee machine." It was presented as a joke. It wasn't.

[Source: NOS]

The Jetten Factor: An Experienced Minister Takes the Top Job

Rob Jetten is about to become the youngest Prime Minister in Dutch history at 38 years old. But unlike some portrayals might suggest, he is not without government experience. From January 2022 to July 2024, Jetten served as Minister for Climate and Energy in the Rutte IV government, the first person to hold this newly created position. In that role, he oversaw the creation of a €35 billion Klimaatfonds (Climate Fund), introduced an energy price cap during the 2022 energy crisis, and reduced Dutch dependence on Russian gas. From January to July 2024, he also served as First Deputy Prime Minister (viceminister-president) and briefly as acting Finance Minister.

His performance during the coalition agreement presentation was characteristically measured. He spoke of a "samenwerkingskabinet" (cooperation government) and an "outstretched hand" to opposition parties. He avoided the triumphalism that usually accompanies coalition agreements, presumably because there is nothing to be triumphant about. The agreement represents the start of a process, not its conclusion.

The coalition structure itself remains partially unclear. Bontenbal has stated he will remain as CDA fractievoorzitter (parliamentary group leader) rather than becoming a minister. Yeşilgöz has not confirmed whether she will join the government, though her name circulates for Defence, she previously served as Minister of Justice and Security in Rutte IV. Current Finance Minister Heinen (VVD) is expected to continue in his role. Whether Letschert herself might become a minister is officially "not discussed," according to the informateur, though the question keeps being asked.

The beëdiging (swearing-in ceremony) is scheduled for February 23, assuming everything proceeds according to plan. The AIVD (General Intelligence and Security Service) still needs to screen potential ministers. The Tweede Kamer debates the agreement on Tuesday. And someone still needs to figure out who actually wants to serve in a government where every policy proposal requires negotiating with parties that weren't at the table.

Conclusion: The Triumph of Hope Over Arithmetic

'Aan de slag' is a strange document. It is simultaneously ambitious and provisional, detailed and meaningless, confident and pleading. It contains plans that would transform the Netherlands if implemented, paired with the implicit acknowledgment that implementation depends entirely on parties who had no say in writing them.

The three coalition leaders insist this is how it should work. "We believe that society wants a politics that shows that working together delivers more than working against each other," they write. Perhaps. But society might also want a politics that can actually deliver on its promises, and on that count, the jury remains out.

The financial framework is clear enough: massive investment in defence funded by a combination of spending cuts (healthcare, social security) and tax increases (the "vrijheidsbijdrage"). The policy framework is comprehensive: nitrogen targets, housing goals, climate ambitions, regulatory simplification. The political framework is... optimistic. Very optimistic.

What we have instead is a government that will spend the next four years (assuming it lasts that long) in a state of permanent formatie. Every budget will be a crisis. Every reform will be a battle. Every success will be partial and every failure will be blamed on the opposition's unwillingness to cooperate. It is not how the Netherlands has traditionally been governed, but it is how the Netherlands will be governed now.

The agreement's title, 'Aan de slag,' is usually translated as "Get to Work" or "Let's Go." But it can also mean "Start Working On It," which implies the work hasn't actually begun. Given the circumstances, the ambiguity seems appropriate. D66, VVD, and CDA have produced a document. Whether that document will become policy depends on everyone else. The real work starts now.

Good luck to them. They'll need it.