Cabinet gathers to weigh right-wing bloc’s new joint demands

The new alliance brings together far-right JA21, orthodox Protestant SGP and the farmer-citizen movement BBB. Its purpose is to negotiate as one bloc and gain concessions from the cabinet. The alliance says it will support the remaining tax plan if its demands are accepted and will take a constructive approach to the budget.

Its joint demands cover several contentious areas. BBB wants changes to nitrogen policy. JA21 wants harsher asylum measures. SGP wants a pause on late-term abortions, home abortions and surrogacy. The parties also oppose planned tax increases for NATO defence spending and a VAT rise on flowers.

They are seeking economic benefits too. The alliance wants higher profit exemptions for small businesses. Its demands could reshape the cabinet’s negotiations because they conflict with positions held by coalition partners and opposition party PRO. The cabinet must now decide whether to move rightward or risk losing this potential support.

Three parties belong to the new alliance: far-right JA21, orthodox Protestant SGP and the farmer-citizen movement BBB. They announced their partnership on Thursday morning after sending their demands to the cabinet the previous evening. Acting together gives them more leverage than negotiating separately over the government’s tax plan.

Their central joint demands concern three policy areas: asylum, nitrogen and abortion. JA21 is seeking harsher asylum measures. BBB wants adjustments to nitrogen plans. SGP wants a pause on late-term abortions, home abortions and surrogacy. These positions are now shared demands of all three parties.

The bloc also has financial demands. It wants the cabinet to drop planned tax increases for NATO defence spending and cancel a VAT rise on flowers. It seeks higher profit exemptions for small businesses. If accepted, the alliance says it will back the rest of the tax plan and approach the budget constructively.

The article presents the tax plan as a package of government tax proposals under negotiation. It includes raising taxes to fund defence spending for NATO, increasing VAT on flowers and setting profit exemptions for small businesses. The cabinet is trying to secure enough political support for this package and the wider budget.

The alliance has offered conditional backing. It says that, if the cabinet accepts its demands, the three parties will support the rest of the tax plan and take a constructive approach to the budget. This gives their position practical importance, even though the article does not state that they alone can pass the plan.

Their support is politically difficult to obtain. The alliance’s asylum, abortion and nitrogen demands clash with positions inside the coalition and with PRO’s nitrogen position. The alliance therefore could help the plan move forward, but accepting its conditions could make broad support across the political spectrum even less likely.

If the cabinet rejects the alliance’s demands, the three parties have said they will not offer their promised support for the rest of the tax plan. They would also no longer be committed to taking a constructive approach to the budget. The article does not say the plan would automatically fail, but its passage and political backing could become harder.

The cabinet is balancing competing routes to support. Left-wing opposition parties and right-wing opposition parties have said the coalition must choose a direction. D66 and CDA prefer broad support involving parties such as PRO and Volt, while VVD has been leaning rightwards. The alliance’s position strengthens that pressure.

Accepting the demands would not solve every problem. Ending the spreading law conflicts with the asylum minister’s stated position. The defence tax is sensitive for CDA, abortion and surrogacy clash with D66, and nitrogen changes threaten PRO’s support. Either choice could therefore damage another part of the government’s coalition strategy.

The spreading law is described as an obligation requiring all councils to house a fair share of asylum seekers. Its purpose, as presented in the article, is to distribute responsibility for accommodation among councils rather than leave it to only some local authorities. The alliance wants this obligation ended as part of its asylum demands.

That demand is difficult because it conflicts directly with the position of asylum minister Bart van den Brink of CDA. He has said he cannot commit to ending the law. The cabinet therefore cannot easily promise the change without confronting the responsible minister’s stated limit and the coalition’s internal disagreements.

The issue also illustrates the wider political cost of the alliance’s conditions. The group links its support for the tax plan and budget to tougher asylum policy. Meeting the demand could help secure right-wing backing, but refusing it risks losing that support. The cabinet must weigh these consequences alongside its aim of broader political support.

The nitrogen dispute concerns changes demanded by BBB to the cabinet’s nitrogen plans. The article says those plans are tied to agreements the government considers necessary for permits to be issued again. Changing them is therefore not a minor policy adjustment; it could undermine the arrangements the cabinet says are needed to restart permits.

The political mechanism is especially clear with PRO. The left-wing party has said it will withdraw its support if the nitrogen plans are substantially changed. That gives PRO a veto-like influence over the cabinet’s search for backing, even as BBB makes the opposite demand. The alliance has turned BBB’s position into a joint condition.

The cabinet consequently faces a direct choice between competing sources of support. Accepting the alliance’s nitrogen demand could satisfy BBB, JA21 and SGP but cost PRO’s support. Rejecting it could protect the permit agreements and PRO’s backing, while making the alliance less likely to support the tax plan and budget.

A multiparty coalition government depends on agreements because no single party controls every decision. Parties must coordinate their votes on taxes, budgets and major policies. The cabinet therefore needs arrangements that different coalition and opposition parties can accept. Without enough support, a proposal may be blocked, weakened or delayed.

The article gives a clear example. JA21, SGP and BBB say they will support the rest of the tax plan if their demands are met. But their conditions include tougher asylum policy, nitrogen changes and abortion restrictions. Those demands conflict with positions held by coalition parties and with PRO’s promise to withdraw support if nitrogen plans change substantially.

This creates a strategic choice for the cabinet. D66 and CDA prefer broad support from across the political spectrum, while VVD has been leaning rightwards. Moving toward the new alliance could secure some votes but lose others. The government must build agreements that keep its budget and major policies politically viable.