Minister Bruins: “Thanks to the opposition, education is in a better state than it was eleven months ago”
At the end of a tumultuous academic year and the fall of the cabinet, outgoing Minister of Education, Culture and Science Bruins looks back. He fears that populists will want to intervene in higher education after the elections. “Entire faculties could have been cut.”
Minister Bruins frequently described his own multibillion-euro cuts to education, culture and science as ‘painful’ and ‘ugly’. Now, he thanks his ‘opponents’: “Thanks to the opposition and other friends of education, our educational system is in a better state than it was eleven months ago.”
Following protracted coalition negotiations, Bruins was asked to become Minister for Education. That appointment came with the burden of major budget reductions, including the controversial ‘slow student fine’ for those who took longer to finish their degrees. Yet he has no regrets that many of his measures were softened—or dropped altogether—under pressure from mass protests and fierce political opposition.
‘Useless Science’
With Geert Wilders’ PVV having withdrawn from the coalition and fresh elections on the horizon, Minister Bruins feels freer to speak his mind about the rise of populist sentiment in The Hague. “In today’s political climate, entire faculties or departments could very easily have been scrapped—dismissed as so-called ‘useless science’.”
There has been no shortage of issues to address since he took office, but Eppo Bruins rarely grants interviews. Last Wednesday, however, he made time to speak, following an event on academic autonomy. He warns against politicians who undermine the rule of law.
How much power should a minister hold in populist times?
Bruins: “We must be wary of excessive political control over higher education. Before you know it, politics starts taking positions on academic content. We often look with concern at the United States, but I believe we came uncomfortably close here in the Netherlands too. There are people here who argue the public broadcaster is biased and should be defunded. And others who claim science is ‘just another opinion’.”
Are you suggesting your own cabinet brought us close to an American-style situation?
“I’m not saying anything specific happened. But we now have political parties and a climate where respected science and a functioning public broadcaster are no longer taken for granted. In this cabinet, it’s the more moderate voices that ensured our constitutional democracy still functions as it should.”
Was the (public broadcaster) NPO nearly dismantled?
“When it was announced that only €100 million would be cut from the public broadcaster, Hilversum breathed a sigh of relief. Everyone knew there were far more drastic scenarios on the table.”
That sigh of relief wasn’t heard from the universities.
“No, because the nearly one-billion-euro cuts to higher education were no cause for celebration. They were extremely harsh.”
So universities are bearing the brunt of these cuts?
“They are, which is why we need to better articulate that higher education and research serve society. I want to use my remaining time in office to open that conversation.”
Why is that important?
“Some parts of the political spectrum view academic freedom, press freedom, educational independence, and freedom for creative professionals as inconvenient. That’s why I consistently underscore the importance of the rule of law in all my speeches and debates. And the rule of law is something we all uphold together. It means taking the Council of State, advisory bodies, and Parliament seriously. But it also means treating science as a robust method of acquiring knowledge. Some political actors see that differently—they think, ‘I have an opinion, so that’s what we’ll do.’ If those voices grow stronger in the next election, we truly risk following the American path.”
You say we should be wary of politicians, but you’re a politician who imposed cuts on universities. That’s quite a statement.
“Politicians have to make choices about the country’s future. We’ve chosen to spend more on defence and increase take-home pay. That costs a lot of money, which we’ve partly sourced by cutting back on education and research. These cuts are executable, though I acknowledge they include harsh elements—like the measure affecting educational opportunity funding in secondary schools. It’s now up to Parliament to decide whether to create more space for education and science.
“I’m very clear on this: politicians are responsible for how we spend public money—but they should not interfere with content. I want the minister who follows me to have less power, not more. I want less influence over the media authority, less say in science policy, and less control over journalism ethics. These are not areas in which politicians should express opinions.”
Crossing the line
This past year, boundaries have often been tested. Parties like BBB and PVV have directly attacked the public broadcaster and universities. But Bruins believes that even the centre-right VVD has sometimes gone too far.
In April, Claire Martens, the VVD’s spokesperson for higher education, asked whether Bruins could pressure university supervisory boards over their handling of pro-Palestinian protests. Her reasoning: the Minister appoints those boards.
On paper, Bruins responded cautiously. Now, he’s more forthright: “The implication was that I should take action against those boards. In theory, I could dismiss them. But I absolutely will not. I refuse.”
If you want less power, will you stop appointing university supervisors?
“It’s a fair question—whether it's wise for a minister to do so. But these appointments follow open recruitment procedures. I receive a single nominated name and give my formal approval. That process maintains sufficient distance. My signature is simply a confirmation of a transparent process.”
Do universities raise concerns with you about these political pressures?
“No, not yet. But by now, people know I would never intervene in that way.”
You consider yourself part of the moderate voices. In what sense have you protected higher education from “American conditions”?
“I do believe I’ve played a protective role—without wanting to overstate my own importance. But I see myself as a guardian of constitutional democracy. It’s my mission to defend our fundamental freedoms, especially now that some politicians see those freedoms very differently.
“Look, what happens in America is extreme and unlikely to happen here. We always have to govern in coalitions. But even then, we must think very carefully about who we place in my role. A Dutch minister doesn’t wield the power of a U.S. president, but they could still hold very different views on science and journalism.”
So we have the opposition to thank, not your cabinet, for watering down the coalition’s plans?
“I said: thanks to the opposition and the many friends of education. In the first two weeks of this government, we immediately saved the sector plans. And it was also official cabinet policy to make clear how impractical the slow-student measure would be to implement. Once again, thanks to the opposition and the many friends of education—including within the cabinet—the outlook for my successor is better now than it was eleven months ago when I took office.”
