Wilders' asylum plan.. a failed revival of an old rhetoric
In an unusual press conference, PVV leader Geert Wilders announced a new immigration plan, emphasizing that "the gloves are off" and stressing that his patience with the government's performance on asylum issues has run out. However, he presented nothing new in his plan, only recycling old ideas that had previously failed.
Wilders, who has rarely appeared publicly lately, vowed that his party would leave the government unless he sees progress in the implementation of what he described as 'the strictest asylum policy ever' within weeks. However, most of the points he raised are taken from previous election programs and old tweets, or from previous failed attempts to amend the coalition agreement.
With the decline in the popularity of the PVV since January, Wilders is seeking to return to the forefront through the asylum issue, although public interest has shifted to global trade and international security issues since Donald Trump's return to the White House.
One of the key points in his plan was to use the army to guard the borders, a proposal that was immediately rejected by the VBM Armed Forces Union, emphasizing that this is not the army's role. He also called for suspending European quotas for receiving refugees until the numbers decrease, although the European Union had previously rejected this proposal in light of much larger numbers of refugees coming from Syria.
He also proposed closing the overcrowded refugee reception centers and returning Syrian refugees to their country within six months, although the government itself is still assessing the safety of some areas in Syria for return, based on a previous request from Wilders. The immigration service has already halted processing Syrian applications, leading to a doubling of the number of those waiting for a decision for more than 15 months.
To solve the housing crisis, Wilders proposes expelling refugees who have obtained residency and preventing municipalities from classifying them as emergency cases in housing, demanding that they find housing themselves through their relatives or Dutch people "who claim to be concerned about them." However, this proposal will provoke severe legal objections.
One of the glaring contradictions in Wilders' position is that he continues to hold the minister he chose himself, Marjolein Faber, responsible for this issue, despite his acknowledgment that she has achieved little of note. Faber has been criticized by the Council of State for the weakness of the laws she proposed and for the lack of clarity on how to improve the asylum system.
It has also received warnings from lawyers that the "two-tier refugee system" will open the door to legal appeals, which had previously been neglected for this reason. The immigration agency does not have the capacity to implement its plans and was forced to request an additional 900 million euros from the Ministry of Finance instead of providing 3.5 billion as promised. This amount includes about 100 million euros in fines imposed by the courts due to delays in processing applications.
In the end, the biggest flaw in Wilders' plan is his reliance on Faber to execute it, despite its dismal failure so far. "We, and no one else, won the elections," said Wilders. But winning a quarter of the votes in the Dutch proportional system means being able to work with others, not ruling alone. The decision remains with the voters whether he deserves another chance.