nrc.nl
Dutch Election 2025: Low Public Trust in Politics Remains a Silent Issue
The upcoming Dutch parliamentary elections on October 29th show a striking absence of the 'trust crisis' between government and citizens as a central campaign theme, despite record-low public confidence and the persistence of the underlying issues.
- How do the current election platforms of major parties reflect the diminished focus on the public trust crisis?
- Parties like the VVD have dropped references to restoring public trust, focusing instead on efficiency and smaller government. Even NSC, which rose to prominence in 2023 on this issue, now places it as a secondary theme in their platform. GroenLinks-PvdA's focus has shifted to the government trusting citizens.
- What are the potential consequences of this lack of attention to the public trust crisis in the upcoming election and beyond?
- Ignoring the widespread public distrust could further deepen the existing cycle of voter anger and broken political promises. The absence of new populist parties might intensify existing divisions instead of offering a fresh perspective. The continued low trust could lead to voter apathy or a reinforcement of existing political alignments.
- What is the most significant contrast between the 2023 and the upcoming 2025 Dutch parliamentary elections regarding public trust in politics?
- While the 2023 elections prominently featured the erosion of public trust as a major theme, fueled by events like the Allowance scandal and Groningen gas extraction, the 2025 election campaigns largely ignore this issue, despite a recent poll showing an all-time low of 4% public trust in politics.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article focuses heavily on the lack of attention given to the declining trust between the government and citizens in the upcoming elections, framing this as a significant oversight. The headline and introduction emphasize this absence, potentially influencing readers to perceive this issue as more important than others. The repeated mention of the 4% trust rating reinforces this emphasis. However, the article also presents counterpoints, such as the expert's view that skepticism is not inherently negative and the fact that other issues remain prominent.
Language Bias
While the article uses neutral language for the most part, phrases like "vrome woorden" (pious words) and descriptions of the government's actions as "ruziënd uiteen viel" (fell apart quarreling) and "slechter" (worse) reveal a slightly negative tone towards the government. The use of the term "populist newcomers" also carries a subtle negative connotation. More neutral alternatives could be used in some instances.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses primarily on the lack of attention to the trust crisis and the potential consequences. While other significant issues are mentioned, a more in-depth analysis of the various parties' stances on these issues, besides the trust crisis, would provide a more complete picture. The article also lacks analysis of the factors that have improved public trust in the past, potentially leading to a more balanced narrative. However, this omission may be due to space and audience constraints.
False Dichotomy
The article does not present a false dichotomy in the traditional sense, but it implies a simplified view of the relationship between voter dissatisfaction and political outcomes. The repeated emphasis on the declining trust and the lack of attention to it could implicitly suggest that this is the only significant factor impacting the election, overlooking other crucial factors.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights a significant decline in public trust in the government, directly impacting SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) which aims to promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels. The low public trust, fueled by political infighting and lack of tangible results, undermines the effectiveness and accountability of institutions, hindering progress towards this SDG.