Strict new lobby rules leave 65 ex-Dutch ministers on taxpayer allowances
Strict new anti-revolving door rules intended to prevent former Dutch cabinet members from cashing in on their government connections are making it far harder for them to land new jobs, leaving 65 of them on taxpayer-funded waiting allowances, De Telegraaf reports.
The regulations, which took effect after unanimous approval by both chambers of parliament last year, require former ministers and state secretaries to seek advice from a special review board for any non-political job during a two-year cooling-off period. The board issues a traffic-light judgment: green for no objections, orange for approval with conditions, or red for “don’t do it” if the move creates the appearance of a reward for past policy decisions.
Business contacts with civil servants on policy areas the former official handled intensively are banned outright. The rules do not apply to purely political posts, such as a seat in the lower house of parliament or appointment as mayor.
Several former members of the fallen Schoof cabinet told De Telegraaf the broad wording is complicating their searches, especially for subject specialists whose expertise falls squarely in the areas now off-limits. The musical chairs in the Schoof cabinet have left many more people on waiting allowances than usual, adding millions of euros in extra costs to taxpayers, the newspaper reported.
Fleur Agema, former PVV vice prime minister and longtime healthcare specialist, said the rules hit hardest for people like her. “The consequence is that the now 65 former officeholders still on wachtgeld have a harder time getting a new job,” Agema said. “Many former officeholders from the Schoof cabinet are so-called subject specialists. Their expertise lies in the area to which their lobby ban applies, and that makes it extra complicated.”
Weeks after the cabinet collapsed, she received what she called a good offer through a lobbying firm but had to turn it down. “Not because this job was comparable to the case of Cora van Nieuwenhuizen, but because the law is formulated more broadly than her case,” Agema said. “‘The appearance of’ works as a kind of dragnet through the options you have.”
Van Nieuwenhuizen, who was minister of infrastructure and water management, later joined the lobby group Energie-Nederland. Current D66 minister Stientje van Veldhoven also left a state secretary post to become a lobbyist. The new law was written precisely to stop such transitions.
Gijs Tuinman, former state secretary of defense, said he turns down job offers almost daily. “In fact, you are sitting on the penalty bench for two years,” Tuinman said. “I get a job offered almost every day, but I have to turn down everything. I don’t want any government money at all and prefer to earn my own income through a job. Actually, because of these rules, a term lasts not four years, but six. But then we also have to explain that honestly to people.”
Arno Rutte, former VVD state secretary of justice and security, said he had to reject a supervisory role in copyright matters because it conflicted with his previous portfolio.
“We really don’t need to have pity for politicians, but I would like to do something about it,” Rutte said. “As far as I’m concerned, they are quite strict because almost every form of contact counts as lobbying. It goes quite far to say that you then can’t have contact with a ministry for two years if you already came from a certain sector. It borders on a professional ban.”
An unnamed former Schoof cabinet minister said he had already broken off four job applications. He warned that the rules would deter qualified outsiders from taking government posts.
“Then you only get career politicians,” he said. He also objected to the board publishing its advice on every job, saying some employers refuse to participate because of confidentiality concerns and that the process should be applied more flexibly.
The rules originated in the Rutte cabinets to stop former officials from exploiting their networks, authority, or inside information for personal or commercial gain. European anti-corruption body GRECO and the European Commission had repeatedly criticized the Netherlands for weak safeguards against conflicts of interest.
Not every former official is complaining. Judith Uitermark, who served as minister of the interior and was previously a judge, said she understands the frustration but supports the law.
“I understand that it is an obstacle for former officeholders, but it serves a major interest,” Uitermark said. “There is a reason two years of wachtgeld is available, and it is also not a professional ban.”
She added, “Practice will still have to show how well this works. Soon we will share experiences. I myself, as a former judge, cut the ties when I became active in The Hague, and that is quite a big sacrifice.”
Eddy van Hijum, former vice prime minister and minister of social affairs, declined to discuss any job applications but said the legislation was necessary.
“The anti-revolving-door legislation was, moreover, needed in the Netherlands,” he said, citing European rankings on corruption risks. “A lot is still possible. Don’t forget that. Working for the public cause is, in any case, exempted.”
Eppo Bruins, former education minister, said the rules do not hinder him. He now works as a supervisor in mental-health care and as an organizational advisor and leadership coach.
“The anti-revolving door legislation does not bother me as long as I just don’t have direct contact with former civil servants,” Bruins said. “I don’t need those contacts.”
