Sorry Geert; Populism will only work in Britain
Miles Faber
J’ACCUSE
Something familiar to anyone who follows European politics on X is sensational headlines advertising a new shocking result from a dangerous populist party which results in no change of policy whatsoever. “EUROPE HAS BEEN SAVED”. The entry of the marble statue accounts into this market since the advent of Musk’s payout system has made the election merry-go-round all the more unbearable.
Many of these right-populists on the continent sneer at our “stupid electoral system” that results in only five seats (0.7%) from 14% of the vote (like with UKIP in the 2010s). It’s timely to remind the attendees of the “Remigration Conference” as well as the broad base of right-populist voters not to throw stones in glass houses and demonstrate that — if there is a solution through democratic means as presently constituted — it will happen in Great Britain first.
I will use the Netherlands as an illustrative example, because of its constitutional similarities to Britain but also for topicality as their cabinet fell this morning, after the coalition failed to adopt his ten point plan on immigration which included the closure of all refugee centres. On the 7th of July 2023 the Fourth Rutte cabinet fell for identical reasons — failure to agree on asylum and immigration policy — four and a half months later an election took place doubling the right-wing opposition leader Geert Wilders’ seat share to 37/150.
This was celebrated as a decisive victory. Seven months later however there was still no coalition agreement, and it was not until the 2nd of July 2024 that the cabinet was sworn in with, unusually, none of the party leaders becoming Prime Minister but rather a life-long Labour Party (PvdA) member and senior civil servant, Dick Schoof. Widely described as ‘technocratic’ he is something between the late Jeremy Heywood and John Brennan, a senior civil servant and domestic intelligence spook.
His appointment to Minister-President without a parliamentary mandate is unusual, but his cabinet lacking one is not; parliamentary membership is not necessary to be appointed a minister in the Netherlands and he and his coalition partners are given a free hand to appoint technically competent outsiders with real world experience in their portfolios. Very seldomly this may even happen. For the vast majority, however, it is a reward for years of service in the two chambers and party loyalty dating back to their time as the faction leader in Almere County Council (1983-88). Legislative initiative lies with this cabinet or with individual members of the lower house in a similar fashion to Britain, however, unlike in Britain the upper house has an absolute veto.
Consciously designed to ape the House of Lords when it was founded in 1815 it became an indirectly elected body in the aftermath of 1848 and remains that way today, being chosen by members of the provincial parliaments. In this way it presents a blueprint for a worst-case scenario of democratic House of Lords reform – one hundred and fifty salaried lords elected by twelve Holyroods with an absolute veto on legislation.
Of course, this can and often does operate as an ability to amend by the backdoor, it may be communicated that legislation in its present state will be vetoed by after watering down certain provisions it will be passed. This is particularly destructive to new or insurgent parties as elections to the upper house will often have taken place two or more years before, making a comfortable majority coalition in the lower house an impotent minority in the upper. There is also the Raad van State, a body which is analogous in origin to the privy council but with a very different effect, one now filled by various arms-length Blair era bodies in Britain. Each piece of proposed legislation is analysed and given a report with a rating from A to D.
Along with its OBR-like responsibility for monitoring compliance with EU budgetary rules, this gives a small body of three royals and twenty-one failed politicians and jurists the power to sink prospective legislation before it ever makes it past the first reading.
Nevertheless, there is much to be grateful for in the Netherlands. Of the six European countries without dedicated constitutional courts only Great Britian and the Netherlands lack a body for direct constitutional review, and moreover, article 120 of the constitution explicitly forbids judicial review of statutes and treaties. An attempt to make exceptions for when statutes or treaties conflicted with ‘human rights’ in 2008 was abortive, passing both houses on its first reading but failing to gain the two thirds required for a constitutional amendment.
The expansive interpretation of this ruling (see Harmonisatiewet-arrest 1989) creates protections from judicial interference which — while being no comparison to full parliamentary sovereignty — is far superior to every other country in Europe. There is no body of Baronesses Hale in the Netherlands competent to declare a Rwanda plan “Unlawful.”
The result of this is a country where the dark forces of constitutional courts, lawfare and the woke civil service are no more rampant than in the UK (pronounced “United Kingdom”). It is not a country of banning opposition leaders from office for expenses scandals that would make Tory MP’s swimming pool maintenance bills look like Ferdinand Marcos in comparison. Nor of drawn-out domestic security investigations into opposition parties’ constitutional compatibility.
Nevertheless, dramatic and progressive political change is impossible with the present electorate and democratic framework. It is not enough to cut woke waste on public sector salaries, thank you Balkenende norm, you must have the means to create a political consensus on where their power should be reallocated to. Britain is alone in possessing a pathway to this and ensuring its implementation should be the focus of like-minded activists, not mapping the unprecedented performance of a Europe of Sovereign Nation’s party in Slovenia’s mid term elections or talking about remigration in an admittedly nice looking alpine hotel’s events room.
This article (Sorry Geert; Populism will only work in Britain) was created and published by J’Accuse and is republished here under “Fair Use”
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply