What does this left-wing UvA staff think about the left-wing merger party?
If the GroenLinks and PvdA boards have their way, the merger process between the two parties will be accelerated. The issue will be voted on at the joint congress in June of this year, but what do members of both parties at the UvA actually think about it?
PvdA luminary Rick van der Ploeg (68), former Secretary of State for Culture and Media in the Kok II cabinet and professor of Environmental Economics at the UvA, welcomes the merger. “It seems like an excellent idea to me. Driven by the likes of Trump and Orban, populism is on the rise internationally. Left-wing parties must therefore join forces to form a serious power bloc. If nothing happens now, we will maintain the current right-wing political discourse, while we actually need a counter-voice. In the fragmented party landscape of the Netherlands, you need one large party to be able to call the shots. It is no longer just about left and right, but whether you are for or against the rule of law, institutions and decent politics.”
When it comes to the core ideals, the two parties are sufficiently similar, as far as Van der Ploeg is concerned, to be able to move forward together. “The consequences of climate change, one of GroenLinks’ main priorities, affect the traditional PvdA supporters the hardest. This applies to the Netherlands, but also to developing countries. The poorest people in the poorest neighbourhoods are the ones most affected.” The former Secretary of State also believes that the two parties complement each other. “GroenLinks is better able to attract young people, while the PvdA is more appealing to older people. Together, under one flag, they complement each other well. I notice it in everyday practice: when I speak with GroenLinks members, they and the PvdA have a common agenda.”
Polar opposites
Van der Ploeg sees no problem with the fact that, despite the many similarities, there are also differences between the two parties. “The PvdA has always had its polar opposites. I myself was more of the left-liberal wing, but there is also a real trade union wing. Differences of opinion are part and parcel of a large party. It is unhealthy if there is only one opinion, as is the case with Geert Wilders’ party, then there is no room for renewal. Internal dissent ultimately leads to a stronger position.”
A number of Van der Ploeg’s contemporaries, including Gerdi Verbeet, Hans Spekman and Ad Melkert, have vocally opposed the merger. “Some of my former colleagues think we should keep everything as it is, which is why I am happy to speak out about this. The PvdA itself originated as a merger party, after all,” says Van der Ploeg. “In addition, there are also old-timers like Felix Rottenberg and Ruud Vreeman, who, like me, are in favour of cooperation with GroenLinks.” Van der Ploeg is convinced that the merger will eventually happen. “It has been talked about for so long now, a majority of the members want it and the alternative does not offer much salvation. I think GroenLinks can learn a lot from us, but we certainly can from them too.”
Joining forces
Marjan Kuiper (59), student counsellor at the UvA and member of GroenLinks for almost twenty years, is excited about the merger with the PvdA as well. “I think the left should join forces. GroenLinks and the PvdA have the same ideas on many issues, and together we are stronger. As a large party, you are more visible and it is harder to play you off against each other or push you aside.”
Kuiper does not see many substantive obstacles. “Occasionally there will be a difference of opinion, but that does not have to be a problem.” Even a polarising issue like the war in Gaza is not a reason to abandon the merger, according to the student counsellor. “Within both GroenLinks and the PvdA there are also different ideas about this, I think every party has to deal with these kinds of challenges. Ultimately, I expect that we can promote a good, joint, left-wing position on the main issues such as climate, economic vulnerability and education.”
Young talent
And so new talents should be given a chance, says Kuiper. “I think that the young members of both parties should stand up now. At the moment, Timmermans in particular is very much in the spotlight, but for the next elections I think it would be better to have a new, young candidate at the lead.” She does not have a specific favourite candidate. “Although I understand that Habtamu de Hoop may be put forward within the PvdA.”
Kuiper senses a lot of positivity among party members regarding the merger. “In my municipality of Landsmeer, we recently discussed the merger and more than 90 percent voted in favour. If it is possible at the municipal level, I think it should also be possible at the national level.” So the merger will happen soon, as far as Kuiper is concerned. “I hear from many prominent people that they are in favour of the plan. Of course there are opponents, and they are currently getting a lot of attention, but I don’t think their share is so large that they will really set the tone.”
Succes rate
So there are hopeful signs from both camps, but what does history tell us about the success rate of merged parties? “A merger has advantages and disadvantages,” says Professor of Political Science Tom van der Meer. “We see the main opportunities that a merger offers in the short term. Together you appear bigger because the number of parliamentary seats is added together. In our media landscape, that matters. You are more likely to be invited to debates, taken more seriously and seen as an opposition leader, and for that the merger does not even have to be bigger than the sum of its parts. In our parliamentary system, too, you carry more weight as a larger party. You are more likely to be given the floor in parliamentary debates, so in the short term a merger definitely has an effect.”
Yet Van der Meer sees many risks. “The question remains whether such a merger will really grow larger than the two original parties in the long term. The evidence for this is not strong, given historical examples. For example, mergers such as the CDA and the ChristenUnie did not lead to more seats in the long term.” According to Van der Meer, the CDA’s strong growth in the 1980s was mainly due to the popularity of then Prime Minister Ruud Lubbers. “If you look beyond the short-lived boost in popularity of Lubbers and Balkenende, you see that the merger did not change the trend in the long term. The same goes for the ChristenUnie.”
Buffer
“In addition, there is the risk that as a large merger party, you will no longer be able to cover every topic equally well,” Van der Meer continues. “This will create space for other parties on the left such as the PvdD, SP and D66. Until recently, GroenLinks and the PvdA largely targeted the same voters, but within that group they appealed to a slightly different group. As a result, they jointly appealed to a broad group of voters.”
He gives a concrete example: “When an unpopular party leader takes the helm, we see voters leaving for other parties that are very similar in terms of their policies, but do have a popular leader. For example, disappointed GroenLinks voters could be poached by the PvdA, and vice versa. Now the two parties no longer serve as each other’s buffer, which means that disappointed voters can end up somewhere completely different.”
