Dutch Election Signals a Revolt: Voters Demand Digital Competence in Parliament
Table of Contents
The recent Dutch election revealed a surprising shift in voter priorities, signaling that digital expertise is no longer a peripheral asset for political representation, but a core necessity. A grassroots movement, amplified by initiatives like NerdVote, successfully propelled tech-savvy candidates into parliament, even those initially positioned lower on party lists, demonstrating a growing disconnect between established political structures and the digitally aware electorate.
While the centrist-liberal D66 party and Geert Wilders’ far-right PVV engaged in a tight race for first place, the most significant outcome for the tech sector unfolded further down the ballot. Barbara Kathmann, of the combined GroenLinks-PvdA (GreenLeft-Labour) party and a prominent advocate for digital rights and sovereignty, faced potential loss of her seat based on initial party performance. However, a surge of over 25,000 personal preference votes secured her return to the House of Representatives.
This outcome wasn’t accidental, but rather a direct result of increasing public awareness regarding the critical importance – and inherent vulnerabilities – of the Netherlands’ digital infrastructure. “The voters have sent a clear signal,” a respected technologist and government advisor stated. “The political parties themselves placed their digital candidates lower on their lists. Now, the voters have said: ‘No, we are mobilising ourselves,’ and they organised 30,000 votes for Barbara.”
Bert Hubert, founder of PowerDNS and a former regulator of the Dutch intelligence services, is the driving force behind NerdVote, a platform dedicated to highlighting candidates with proven tech expertise. Early data analysis suggests a “Nerd factor” at play, with approximately 1% of voters in university cities like Utrecht, Leiden, and Delft casting their preference vote for Kathmann.
The Disconnect with ‘Party Dinosaurs’
The success of the NerdVote campaign underscores a troubling disconnect between the concerns of citizens – including digital sovereignty, cybersecurity, and the influence of Big Tech – and the priorities of established political leaders. The question arises: why were these qualified candidates initially relegated to less-electable positions?
Hubert offered a blunt assessment, characterizing the composition of electoral lists as often determined by “party dinosaurs” – long-serving party veterans who, in his words, “are people who print out their emails.”
“They are all balancing interests when putting together the voting list,” Hubert explained. “They need someone from the cultural sector, someone representing the Antilles, and eventually, someone falls off the table. Well, that’s usually the nerd. Because none of those party dinosaurs, and this applies to all parties, have any affinity with the topic.”
This lack of understanding creates a dangerous blind spot, particularly in a nation like the Netherlands, which hosts the Amsterdam Internet Exchange (AMS-IX), a crucial hub for global internet traffic, and serves as a landing point for vital North Sea data cables. “In our governing bodies, we have absolutely no respect for technology,” Hubert asserted. “It’s seen as sewerage: it’s important, but preferred to be underground, and not seen. And therefore, nobody is going to make policy about it. They all expect someone else to fix it.”
Paper Tigers and Unfulfilled Promises
This attitude has resulted in a situation where, despite numerous policy documents, concrete action remains elusive. Weeks before the election, a ‘Digital Debate’ organized by 10 industry bodies revealed widespread frustration. While politicians across the political spectrum acknowledged the need for greater European digital autonomy, concrete plans for achieving this goal remained largely undefined, a sentiment echoed by Kathmann during the debate: “We are simply not in the driver’s seat, and that has to change drastically. As far as I’m concerned, you could even legislate for that.”
Queeny Rajkowski of the conservative-liberal VVD party mentioned a €42 billion investment fund for digital sovereignty, a commitment the tech sector will closely monitor. However, Hubert noted that the majority of funding for Dutch digital projects currently originates from Brussels, not The Hague. “In The Hague, no real money is forthcoming,” he said, describing Dutch politics as a “residents’ association meeting” focused on “petrol, foreigners and nitrogen.” He argued that it’s convenient to “launder” digital policy through Brussels, which appears to grasp the urgency of the situation.
Their approach was not revolutionary but largely pragmatic. They started by migrating 70% of employees who only use basic office functions, while providing special support for the remaining 30% with complex use cases, such as intricate Microsoft Excel macros. “In the Netherlands, we often say: ‘No, we can’t possibly change, because one person in accounting has 47 Excel sheets with a macro link’,” Hubert observed. The success of a similar phased approach in Germany demonstrates its feasibility.
This shift also fundamentally alters the dynamic with suppliers. As Hubert pointed out, negotiating with Microsoft about the price of Teams while simultaneously using Teams for the negotiation puts one at a disadvantage. “Can you imagine what a different negotiating position you have when you tell Microsoft, ‘come on over to our own videoconferencing tool’?” he asked. “That could likely save hundreds of millions.”
The Waiting Game and Uncertain Future
With the election resulting in a virtual tie and a complex coalition formation process looming, the future of Dutch digital policy remains uncertain. The strong performance of D66, now boasting several digitally astute MPs, including Hanneke van der Werf, a veteran digital policy expert, and newly elected Sarah El Boujdaini, a senior advisor on Data and AI at the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, offers a glimmer of hope. Kathmann’s re-election through preference votes is a clear victory for digital awareness.
However, this personnel churn also introduces systemic delays, a concern highlighted by Van der Werf during the Digital Debate. “If we get a whole new batch of digital spokespeople again […] that’s how we, to put it bluntly, incur a lot of delays here in The Hague,” she said.
The central question remains whether this newfound parliamentary expertise will translate into a government willing to act decisively. While many have called for a dedicated minister for digital affairs with substantial authority, Hubert believes this is a misguided priority. “If people truly found it important, such a ministry would emerge naturally,” he said. “But now we’re trying to do the opposite: create a minister or ministry and then hope people will find it important.”
Hubert pointed to the current arrangement – placing digitalization under a state secretary also responsible for the Dutch Caribbean – as evidence of the problem’s scale. “That already tells you we don’t find it very important – first, we give it to a state secretary, and second, we split that role with the Antilles.”
Hubert advocates for coordinated, government-wide ICT policy as a first step. Currently, he noted, “every forest ranger can buy their own IT,” leading to fragmented systems and leaving smaller agencies vulnerable to suppliers. Only with such rigorous policy in place, he argued, would a dedicated minister be truly effective. Or will digital policy remain an underfunded portfolio split between multiple responsibilities?
For now, the Netherlands remains in a holding pattern. The voters have demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of the stakes. It is now up to the “party dinosaurs” and the incoming coalition to prove they have heard the message and are prepared to move beyond empty promises and finally build a digitally sovereign nation.
