Dutch far-right leader Geert Wilders quits government in dispute over immigration
Date: 2025-06-03T10:18:06.000Z
Title:
Content: The Guardian's Europe correspondent, Jon Henley, has some detail about the reaction of Geert Wilders' (now former) coalition partners to him leaving the government, a move that will likely trigger snap elections. Here is an extract from his write up:
Wilders said the partners refused to adopt his 10-point plan for halting immigration for the purpose of seeking asylum, as he had demanded last week. Legal experts have said several of the proposals are in breach of European human rights laws or the UN refugee convention, to which the Netherlands is a signatory.
Dilan Yeşilgöz, the leader of the liberal-conservative VVD party, a coalition member, said prime minister Dick Schoof had urged the leaders to act responsibly before Tuesday's meeting.
'The prime minister, who appealed to us this morning, said that we are facing enormous international challenges, we have a war on our continent, an economic crisis may be coming our way,' Yeşilgöz said. She said she was 'shocked' by Wilders's decision, which she described as 'super-irresponsible'.
Another coalition party leader, Caroline van der Plas of the populist Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB), said she was very angry, and also called Wilders 'irresponsible'. Nicolien van Vroonhoven of the New Social Contract (NSC) said it was 'incomprehensible'.
Wilders's plan includes enlisting the army to secure and patrol the borders, closing refugee accommodation facilities, sending all Syrian refugees home, suspending EU asylum quotas and banning family members joining refugees already in the country.
Update:
Date: 2025-06-03T10:13:00.000Z
Title: Far-right Dutch leader Geert Wilders quits government in dispute over immigration and asylum policy
Content: The Dutch far-right leader Geert Wilders has pulled his party out of the country's four-party ruling coalition in a row over immigration and asylum policy, plunging the country into political uncertainty.
Wilders, whose Freedom party (PVV) was the biggest in the coalition, said this morning he had informed the prime minister, Dick Schoof, that all PVV ministers would leave the government.
Following a brief meeting in parliament of leaders of the four parties that make up the fractious administration, Wilders wrote in a post on X earlier today:
No signature for our asylum plans. No changes to the Main Outline Agreement. PVV leaves the coalition.
It is unclear what will happen next. The government could attempt to remain in power as a minority administration or call new elections for later this year. Schoof called an emergency cabinet meeting for early afternoon. Stay with us as we will be providing updates on this story – as well as others from throughout Europe – during the day.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Yvette Cooper's fast-track asylum plan revealed as protests erupt again
The home secretary is set to introduce a new fast-track scheme to tackle the asylum backlog so that decisions can be made in weeks rather than years. As the pressure to cut the number of people waiting in hotels for asylum decisions grows, Yvette Cooper is expected to introduce a new law this autumn to overhaul the appeal system. It comes as the first 60 migrants were moved into the four-star Britannia International Hotel in Canary Wharf, east London, on Friday night under cover of darkness. There was a small anti-migrant protest outside the Britannia on Saturday afternoon, while much bigger groups of both anti-migrant and anti-fascist protesters congregated outside the Thistle City Barbican Hotel in central London, which also houses asylum seekers, and in the centre of Manchester where hundreds of people marched as part of a protest organised by Britain First, a far-right group. Anti-immigrant protesters in Manchester JAMES SPEAKMAN FOR THE SUNDAY TIMES Home Office figures show that more than 25,000 migrants have attempted to cross the Channel to the UK in small boats this year — the earliest the figure has been reached. Cooper will also tighten the rules surrounding the interpretation of 'exceptional circumstances' in immigration cases and the use of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to family and private life. In an interview with The Sunday Times, Cooper said: 'We need a major overhaul of the appeal [process] and that's what we are going to do in the autumn … if we speed up the decision-making appeal system and also then keep increasing returns, we hope to be able to make quite a big reduction in the overall numbers in the asylum system, because that is the best way to actually restore order and control.' A source familiar with the plans said the aim would be to compress the process so that decisions and returns could be 'made within weeks'. It is understood the system would look similar to a scheme Labour operated while last in government, which was abandoned after judges ruled it was 'structurally unfair' after about 99 per cent of claims were refused. Asylum seekers who are refused sanctuary in Britain are seeing their appeals take an average of 54 weeks to be heard. There were 50,976 outstanding appeals as of March, which is almost double the number compared with 2024 and seven times higher than in 2023, figures show. It is the highest the backlog has ever been and comes on top of the almost 79,000 asylum claims awaiting an initial decision. Residents at the Thistle City Barbican hotel in central London watch from their windows… LUCY NORTH/PA … as anti-immigration protesters gather outside. PA While they wait, many asylum seekers receive state support in the form of accommodation such as hotels — with a bill of £2.1 billion for the taxpayer in the year to March — and a weekly allowance of between £8.86 and £49.18 per person depending on other support. Those who register appeals are entitled to legal aid, at about £820 a case. Of those who received an initial asylum decision in the year to March, just under half (49 per cent) were granted asylum. In the year to March 2024, it was 61 per cent. The proposed changes will cap a series of announcements this summer aimed at restoring order and control in the system. This weekend, Cooper has announced plans to outlaw social media adverts promoting journeys on small boats to asylum seekers or jobs in the black market aimed at luring migrants to the UK. Offenders could receive up to five years in prison and a hefty fine. Home Office analysis shows that approximately 80 per cent of migrants arriving via small boats told officials that they used social media during their illegal journey to the UK, including to locate or communicate with an agent or facilitator associated with an organised crime group. Under an amendment to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill going through parliament, a new UK-wide offence will be introduced to criminalise the creation of material for publication online which promotes or offers services facilitating a breach of UK immigration law. This could include small boat crossings, the creation of fake travel documents like passports or visas or explicitly promising illegal working opportunities in the UK. Cooper said: 'Selling the false promise of a safe journey to the UK and a life in this country — whether on or offline — simply to make money, is nothing short of immoral. 'These criminals have no issue with leading migrants to life-threatening situations using brazen tactics on social media. We are determined to do everything we can to stop them — wherever they operate. 'We have to stay one step ahead of the ever-evolving tactics of people-smuggling gangs and this move, part of our Plan for Change to boost border security, will empower law enforcement to disable these tactics faster and more effectively, ensuring people face proper penalties.' The government's 'one in one out' deal with France is also expected to begin in the coming weeks, with people arriving in the UK via small boats being returned to France in exchange for the UK accepting an asylum seeker from France who can demonstrate a genuine family connection to Britain. According to The Times, the pilot scheme is expected to see only up to 50 asylum seekers a week being returned to France, with the same number coming in exchange to the UK. However, Cooper disputed the figure and said: 'We are not fixing numbers. We're very clear we want to operate this as extensively as possible.' • 'One in, one out' migrant deal: what are the key plans? Introducing a fast-track scheme to process asylum decisions is expected to require an injection of cash from the Ministry of Justice to increase the number of judges and court sitting days. Spelling out her ambition to the home affairs select committee in June, Cooper said: 'One of the things I have always been keen to do is to have a system for fast-track decisions and appeals. 'If people arrive from predominantly safe countries, they should not be sitting in the asylum system for a long time. We should be able to take those decisions really quickly, and make sure that those people go through the appeals system really quickly and are returned really quickly as well. That would mean a fast-track system alongside the main asylum system, and it would be really important in making sure that the system is fair. It will require legislation in order to be able to do that, as well as new system design … I think there should be faster tracks for those cases so that we can get them through the system really quickly.' Last week, as he arrived for a visit to Scotland, President Trump said the 'invasion' of migrants is 'killing' Europe and told politicians to 'get their act together'. Responding to his claims, Cooper blamed the previous Conservative government. 'We inherited a broken immigration system and a broken asylum system,' she said. 'And what we're doing is putting in place the foundations to restore order and control to both systems.'
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Donald Trump may finally have the measure of Putin
Donald Trump turned out to be wrong, although it may not be tactful to point it out, because the world still needs him to support Ukraine, however grudgingly. But we told him that Vladimir Putin had no interest in making peace, and so it has proved. President Trump thought he could persuade the Russian leader to cut a deal over Ukraine. That approach might not have been as misconceived as it sometimes seemed. It might have been possible that a combination of appeasement, flattery and strong-man talk would have worked. But Putin has shown that he is not interested in negotiation. His belief in a Greater Russia, and possibly his need to wage a permanent war in order to maintain his grip on power, means that the bloodshed will continue, and even Mr Trump can see where the blame lies. It was encouraging, therefore, that Mr Trump shortened the deadline for Russia to avoid enhanced sanctions over the Ukraine war to '10 to 12 days' a few days ago. Mr Trump's deadlines are notoriously variable, but the president's meaning was clear. Equally, Mr Trump's war of words with Dmitry Medvedev, Putin's associate and the former president of Russia, confirms that there is little common ground left between Washington and Moscow. The social media spat culminated in Mr Trump sending two United States nuclear submarines to patrol 'near Russia' – after Medvedev warned the US against being drawn into direct conflict with a nuclear power. Mr Trump should never have threatened to withdraw the US's support for the Ukrainian people, but we should be grateful that he failed to follow through on that threat, even if the precise level of current US support for Volodymyr Zelensky's war effort is shrouded in secrecy. Maybe it was worth trying to do a deal with Putin, although it besmirched the reputation of American democracy that Mr Trump should have subjected Mr Zelensky – a brave leader fighting for his people in a noble cause – to that disgraceful theatrical display in the White House in February. Maybe it was worth Mr Trump rudely waking the peoples of Europe to their responsibility to meet a greater share of the cost of defending their continent. But it should never have been at the expense of the defence of the right of a free people to resist aggression. The international community bore, and continues to bear, a moral duty to defend democracy, human rights and the right to self-determination. All democracies should stand by the Ukrainian people in their time of need, however long that time shall be. No one wants the war to continue for a moment longer, but Mr Trump is now as clear as the rest of the world has been that Putin is responsible for prolonging the bloodshed. The war could end today if Putin wanted it to. For all the capriciousness of the US president, and for all the bombast of his social media communications, it seems that Mr Trump understands that Putin, and his proxy Medvedev, must not be appeased. Sending US nuclear submarines to patrol 'near Russia' is a symbolic gesture, but if what it symbolises is an increased willingness on the part of Mr Trump to support Ukraine against Putin's aggression, then it is to be welcomed.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Ukraine uncovers drone procurement corruption scheme
Ukraine's anti-corruption agencies uncovered a major graft scheme in the procurement of military drones and electronic warfare equipment, two days after their independence was restored in a humiliating U-turn for Volodymyr Zelensky. The Ukrainian president had pushed through a controversial bill that removed the autonomy of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (Nabu) and the Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (Sapo), placing them under the control of the General Prosecutor's Office, which is led by Zelensky loyalists and mistrusted by many Ukrainians. Thousands of protesters descended onto the streets of Kyiv last week, and there was mounting pressure from top European officials, who warned Ukraine was jeopardising its bid for EU membership. The law was reversed days ago in the Ukrainian parliament and on Saturday, Mr Zelensky announced on Saturday that the agencies had arrested an MP in his ruling party and the head of a local district administration. 'It is important that anti-corruption institutions operate independently, and the law passed on Thursday guarantees them all the tools necessary for a real fight against corruption,' the Ukrainian president said in a statement posted on X, along with pictures of him meeting with the heads of the agencies. '[Nabu] Director Semen Kryvonos and Head of the [Sapo] Oleksandr Klymenko delivered a report,' he wrote. 'A Ukrainian MP, along with heads of district and city administrations and several National Guard service members, were exposed for bribery. I am grateful to the anti-corruption agencies for their work.' 'There can only be zero tolerance for corruption, clear teamwork in uncovering it, and ultimately, a fair sentence.' In a statement published by both agencies, Nabu and Sapo also said they had caught a sitting lawmaker, two local officials and an unspecified number of national guard personnel taking bribes. 'Today, a number of operations were carried out to expose individuals involved in committing a corruption-related crime. The essence of the scheme was to conclude state contracts with supplier companies at deliberately inflated prices,' it said, adding that the offenders had received kickbacks of up to 30 per cent of a contract's cost. Four people had been arrested. A spokesperson for the Nabu agency added that the operation was 'made possible' by the bill which Mr Zelensky signed into law earlier this week, reversing the previous contentious bill. 'This operation is an example of how institutional support and high-level teamwork contribute to real change. We thank the President of Ukraine for supporting the independent anti-corruption infrastructure.' One of the individuals detained was Oleksiy Kuznetsov, an MP from Mr Zelensky's ruling Servant of the People party, the Financial Times reported. Serhiy Haidai, head of the Mukachevo district, was reportedly also arrested. Allies warned Zelensky Mr Zelensky and Andriy Yermak, his powerful chief of staff, had claimed last week that they had rushed through the original bill to counter Russian interference within the corruption agencies. However, critics alleged the step had been designed to protect his political allies from prosecution. Kyiv's western allies, including France, warned the Ukrainian president against following through with the reforms. MPs on Thursday voted 331 to 0 in favour of the new bill in Kyiv's 450-seat legislature to restore their political independence. That was not before two MPs descended into a public brawl in the chamber before others broke up the tussle. Eradicating graft and shoring up the rule of law are key requirements for Kyiv to join the EU, which Ukrainians see as critical to their future as they fend off a Russian invasion. Around 70 MPs from Mr Zelensky's ruling party had expressed doubt over the fresh bill over fears of 'revenge' from the anti-corruption agencies. Zelensky's ruling party had expressed doubt over the fresh bill over fears of 'revenge' from the anti-corruption agencies.
