Dutch government collapses after far-right leader quits coalition
The Dutch government has collapsed after Geert Wilders withdrew his far-right party from the governing coalition following a row over migration.
Prime Minister Dick Schoof confirmed he was stepping down on Tuesday and offered the resignation of the cabinet to King Willem-Alexander.
In televised remarks following an emergency cabinet meeting, Schoof said Wilders' decision to withdraw the support of his PVV party was "irresponsible and unnecessary".
"As far as I'm concerned, this shouldn't have happened," he added.
The governing coalition was in place for less than one year.
The row which led to its collapse came after Wilders pushed for 10 additional asylum measures, including a freeze on applications, halting the construction of reception centres and limiting family reunification.
Schoof had made a last-minute appeal to coalition party leaders on Tuesday morning, but the meeting lasted just one minute before Wilders walked out, ending the coalition.
"No signature for our asylum plans. PVV leaves the coalition," said Wilders on X.
There was shock and anger among political leaders, many of whom pointed out that several of Wilders' demands were similar to policies already in the coalition agreement, and that they would not stand in the PVV's way to implement them.
Many of the additional proposals put forward by Wilders had been dismissed during coalition talks because of legal concerns.
Wilders' decision has put an end to an uneasy governing coalition which was born in July 2024 after months of political wrangling following elections the previous year.
His anti-immigration, far-right PVV was the largest party. The other members were the conservative-liberal VVD, the Farmers' Citizen Movement (BBB) and the centrist New Social Contract.
Geert Wilders: Who is he and what does he want?
From the start the coalition seemed a marriage of convenience, characterised by infighting and appeared to struggle to push through any of policies it had proudly promoted.
Following its collapse, Wilders' former coalition partners accused him of engineering the crisis. VVD leader Dilan Yesilgoz said the move was "super irresponsible", adding: "This wasn't about asylum at all."
"I think Wilders is betraying the Netherlands," said deputy Prime Minister Mona Keijzer from the BBB.
But Wilders appears to feel emboldened. On Tuesday he told reporters that he intended to become prime minister of the Netherlands "and ensure that the PVV becomes bigger than ever in the next elections".
Sandra Phlippen, the chief economist for ABN AMRO bank, said the immediate economic impact of the cabinet's collapse appeared minimal because during its 11 months in office the government had "barely made any concrete plans".
Polls show the far right and Green-Left parties are neck-and-neck, with migration and cost-of-living issues fuelling political volatility across Europe.
Wilders wanted the government to collapse as the support for his Freedom Party continues to drop in the polls, according to Armida van Rij, the Head of the Europe Programme at Chatham House.
With the Nato summit due to be held in the Hague at the end of the month, Schoof's ministers will seek to remain in power in a caretaker capacity until a date is set for the Netherlands to return to the polls - likely in the autumn, according to Dutch media.
In the Dutch political system, becoming prime minister requires forming a majority coalition in the 150-seat parliament.
Even if Wilders again surpasses the political pundits expectations, his decision to collapse the government is being seen as reckless - and perceptions he is putting personal ambition above national stability could further complicate his ability to form alliances after the next election.
The parties that were reluctant or refused to go into government with Wilders after the last election are likely to find that kind of partnership even less attractive now.
In addition, by toppling the coalition over the issue of asylum, it is likely Wilders will put it at the centre of his upcoming election campaign.
However, given that his party had been responsible for asylum and immigration for almost a year, there are no guarantees that such a gamble will pay off.
After six months, Dutch parties reach government deal
Geert Wilders: Who is he and what does he want?
Wilders' Dutch victory sends tremors around Europe
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Cracking the code of making old clothes new again
At the height of the holiday season on Amsterdam's Kalverstraat last December, thousands of shoppers who regularly descend on the popular shopping district came face to face with the grim reality behind humanity's sartorial excess. A local activist group had deposited an enormous pile of clothes on the sidewalk, in sight of stores such as Adidas, Zara and the popular Dutch casual fashion chain Cotton Club. Some seven feet-tall and 25-feet around, the garment dump drew puzzled looks from passersby, some of whom stopped to read handwritten signs poking out the top. "Every 10 minutes we throw away this much clothing in the Netherlands," read one. The intent, the organizers said, wasn't just to draw attention to clothing waste, but to urge companies to reveal how much clothing they make-a first step toward addressing what's long been a disastrous side-effect of the phenomenon known as "fast-fashion." But while a local newspaper ran an article on the protest, not much else came of it. It was however emblematic of a now-well understood problem across Europe, and its seemingly intractable nature. Tied to the arrival in the 1990s of fast fashion-which for the uninitiated is essentially the ability to churn out new clothing lines at cheap prices-the environmental destruction caused by discarded and disintegrating clothing cannot be understated. Attempts at reuse and recycling have only put a small dent in the worsening problem, hindered by a thorny set of technological obstacles to making old clothing new again. But not far from where that pile of discarded pants and tops befuddled Amsterdam shoppers, there is a company that says it may have hit upon a solution. It's one of a handful across the globe trying to crack the code to clothing waste. According to the European Commission, consumers in Europe discard around 5.8 million tons of textiles every year. Globally, that figure comes to 92 million tons. Clothing consumption almost doubled between 1975 and 2020, according to Textile Exchange, a nonprofit that organizes textile and apparel manufacturers and brands around sustainability. It's projected to leap another 25% by 2030. The genesis of (and indeed collateral damage from) fast fashion has been well documented. Global clothing chains such as Zara and H&M pioneered the trend of re-supplying stores with new, low-priced clothing every four-to-six weeks instead of with the seasons, enabling more consumers to follow trends without committing too much cash. Add to that rising incomes in developed nations and low wages in exporting countries, and fast fashion became a winning business model. But those low prices and monthly trends mean the journey from fashion statement to landfill became much shorter-and that's where the environmental disaster began. Clothing as with anything is the sum of its parts. Plastics, dyes and chemicals are leaking out of growing mountains of refuse all over the world, poisoning lands, rivers and oceans. Some of the microplastics inside every human being may easily have originated in a discarded pair of cargo shorts. As for those clothing items that end up in incinerators, well, fast fashion does its part to accelerate global warming, too. And that's just the endgame. The starting point of what many people wear is cotton, and growing it requires tremendous amounts of water, depleting resources in a world where fresh water and arable land are becoming more scarce. Polyester is made from fossil fuels, the burning of which is the prime culprit in climate change-a fact that also applies to the untold number of factories, planes and trucks that make up the global clothing supply chain. Recycling and reuse sound like an appealing solution, but as Bloomberg revealed in a 2022 investigation, much of what's collected ends up overwhelming the usually underdeveloped destinations where it's sent for repurposing, resale or donation. Or the items are "downcycled" into things like stuffing for car seats and mattresses. Producing new clothes from old items hasn't been a workable solution, either, at least not at scale. The processing required reduces the length and strength of fibers, making it hard to turn them into yarn that would be practical for making new clothing. According to a 2024 study in Cleaner Engineering and Technology, the biggest hurdle to recycling clothing is the quality of the end product. Just 1% of old clothes are made into new clothes. But after a decade of attempts, a new wave of recycling tech is taking hold in Europe, with companies and entrepreneurs hoping to break through the barrier between a planet drowning in old clothes and one where everything is effectively a hand-me-down. Andreas Bartl, a senior scientist at Technical University Vienna who studies textile recycling methods and processes, said an inflection point has been reached. "The last two years, technologies have evolved and this is a big jump in quality," he said. "The rate of about 1% will improve in the next years." New sustainability regulations in the Netherlands require the fashion industry incorporate a minimum 16.5% recycled material into their wares by 2030. Similar Europe-wide rules have been proposed as well. Key to recent improvements in the industry's ability to comply may be two technologies being developed by companies in the U.S. and Europe. In the latter, they include La Roche in France, Rester in Finland, Valvan in Belgium, Reju in Germany, the Swedish Waste Management Association (Sysav) and Wieland Textiles, a company just outside Amsterdam owned by Brightfiber Textiles BV. To recycle clothing waste in a way that doesn't do further damage to the environment, different colors must be separated. Otherwise, the raw materials and yarns produced from recycled clothing end up with an unappealing grey hue that, while suitable for mops and stuffing, aren't the foundation of a sustainable clothing line. But Brightfiber and Sysav have come up with something called an optical sorting machine. Since different colors and materials reflect light differently, the machine allows items to be differentiated simply by bouncing light off of them. The ability to separate fibers is also improving, thanks to chemical processes now deployed by Frankfurt-based Reju, a company started in 2023 by Patrik Frisk, a former chief executive of Under Armour and president of Timberland. The company has found a way to separate cotton and wool from polyester or elastane-the material which gives yoga pants, underwear waistbands and skinny jeans their stretch. La Roche, Rester and Valvan meanwhile have developed machines that tear clothing items into small pieces, cleaning them of buttons, zippers and labels. Taken together, these new technologies may enable recycling at a volume never before possible. But the open question is will it be enough for clothing companies to sacrifice the easier, more destructive path to fast-fashion? With its factory just a few miles northwest of Kalverstraat, shoehorned into a logistics center near Amsterdam's western port, Brightfiber said it's the first European company to successfully bring together optical sorting, cutting-cleaning and raw material production to make high-quality substitutes for virgin cotton, wool or blends of organic and sustainable fibers and synthetics like polyester. The company said it began with €5 million ($5.7 million) invested, including a €1 million grant from a Dutch government sustainability initiative. The first thing you see when entering Brightfiber's building is a small showroom of sweaters, shirts and pants-made from recycled clothes, of course. Rather than being obviously repurposed or rough to the touch, they appear and feel similar to the lightweight retail sweater worn by a reporter during a recent visit. Producing such soft, fine yarn is a recent advance from the more primitive cable-knits of earlier designs, said Ellen Mensink, Brightfiber's founder and CEO. To be clear, no one has figured out how to make usable materials that are entirely recycled old clothing. Brightfiber, like its rivals in the growing space, makes material from a combination of recycled fibers, new material and waste pieces. (Waste cloth comes from the factory floor-as much as 40% of material fed into clothing production lines ends up discarded.) The mixture is necessary to deliver the longer fibers needed for quality yarns, the company said. Mensink said Brightfiber's production is derived from between 40% and 70% post-consumer textiles. Also added in are organic and sustainable fibers like lyocell and alpaca-or polyester from recycled bottles. As for color separation, when seen up close, it's clear that a green Brightfiber sweater is not uniform in color, but composed of yarn of many similar shades of green. While making clothing often begins in a cotton field, recycling it begins in a donation bin. Brightfiber buys old clothes by the pound from both charities and companies that gather discarded items from collection points across the Netherlands. Currently around half of textile waste in the country comes from dropoff bins. In Germany, the rate is even higher, at 70% according to Bartl. But worldwide efforts to recycle textile waste sit at only 15%, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. When old clothes arrive at Brightfiber, its optical sorting machine uses near-infrared light to detect a garment's material and color, and then separates the stream into 90 different combinations. There are ten colors and nine material combinations, including cotton-polyester, polyester-elastane and cotton-polyester-elastane. A second machine developed by Valvan chops these into pieces the size of an adult's palm, cleaning them of buttons, zippers and labels. The resulting swatches are then transformed into a fluff similar in look to virgin cotton, thanks to a third machine developed by Brightfiber and Turkey-based Balkan Textile Machinery Ltd. That fluff is in turn spun into yarn for fabrics and end-products that Brightfiber sells to other brands, including the Dutch chain King Louie. The whole line can run 5.5 million pounds a year, according to Mensink. She contends two lines would give the company the capacity to process all of metro Amsterdam's textile waste. Even with these advances, chemical separation will likely remain central to repurposing the vast majority of textiles that aren't made of 100% natural fibers. The ubiquity of polyester in modern clothing makes separating it from other materials inescapable. "It's extracting the polyester and then depolymerizing it-breaking it down back into its monomer, and then polymerizing it again to make it back into polyester," explains Reju's Frisk, who said his company has optimized this process. Reju's method adds a catalyst to one of three existing chemical recycling methods. "This makes it faster and more efficient," Frisk said. Reju's end product becomes feedstock for its owner, France-based Technip Energies NV. The company said its technology is used in about 1,000 polyester factories around the world, representing a third of all polyester manufacturing. Brightfiber and Reju hope to benefit from European Union regulation. So-called Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) mechanisms are already in place in several countries, aimed at forcing textile producers to internalize the cost of waste. In February, the EU Council Presidency and Parliament representatives reached a provisional agreement to harmonize frameworks already existing in France, the Netherlands and elsewhere, with a goal of placing an EPR scheme across all 27 member states. The rules would require manufacturers pay into a fund that will be used to develop recycling infrastructure, with the fees "eco-modulated" so that more-sustainable products cost producers less. Bartl expressed concern though, saying whatever policy comes out of Brussels shouldn't impede existing efforts in Austria, Germany, Finland and the Netherlands. The EU should not "destroy a system that is quite efficient in sorting textiles," he said. Frisk and Bartl agreed that requiring minimum repurposed content for garments might be the best way to jumpstart clothing recycling. "Let's just put it at 5%-whatever, just so the industry knows that this is coming," Frisk said. Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Despite Trump attacks, KY Sen. Rand Paul stands defiant on ‘big, beautiful bill'
Another Kentucky Congressman has drawn the ire of President Donald Trump. This time, it's Sen. Rand Paul, one of the Senate's most vocal opponents of the Trump-backed 'big, beautiful bill' narrowly passed by the House last month. 'If the bill were solely about making the 2017 tax cuts permanent, I wouldn't be a yes; I'd be a hell yes,' Kentucky's junior senator wrote on social media. 'Unfortunately, that's not the reality with this bill. It includes the largest increase of the debt ceiling ever and will have the United States borrowing $5T over the next 2 years. 'This bill is the opposite of conservative, and we should not pass it.' A Congressional Budget Office estimate predicted the bill, if passed, would grow the federal deficit by $2.4 trillion over the next decade. But Trump, who has seen near-unanimous support from Republicans on an array of issues early in his second term, disagrees. 'Rand Paul has very little understanding of the BBB, especially the tremendous GROWTH that is coming,' the president posted Tuesday morning on social media. 'He loves voting 'NO' on everything, he thinks it's good politics, but it's not. The BBB is a big WINNER!!!' A few minutes later, Trump lashed out at Paul in another post. 'Rand votes NO on everything, but never has any practical or constructive ideas. His ideas are actually crazy (losers!). The people of Kentucky can't stand him. This is a BIG GROWTH BILL!' Paul has been elected to the Senate three times by Kentucky voters, most recently winning in 2022 with nearly 62% of the vote. Paul finds himself in the company of another Republican from Kentucky on Trump's bad side. Rep. Thomas Massie, who represents Northern Kentucky's 4th Congressional District, was one of just two House Republicans to vote against the bill. The other GOP opponent was Ohio Rep. Warren Davidson. The bill ultimately passed 215-214, sending it to the Senate for further consideration. It was widely reported by Washington news outlets that Trump went after Massie to his face in a mid-May caucus meeting before the House vote. 'I don't think Thomas Massie understands government. I think he's a grandstander,' Trump said to reporters. Massie was undeterred, and he later joked about his encounter with the president. Trump also slammed Massie in March for opposing a continuing resolution on government funding. 'I will lead the charge against him. He's just another GRANDSTANDER, who's too much trouble and not worth the fight. He reminds me of Liz Cheney before her historic, record-breaking fall loss! The people of Kentucky won't stand for it, just watch. DO I HAVE ANY TAKERS???' Trump wrote on social media. Massie, like Paul, easily won his last election, trouncing two primary challengers in 2024. He had no Democratic opponent in the general election. And, the Trump attack helped his campaign raise more than $200,000 in contributions at the time. Joining Paul and Massie in opposition to the bill was Elon Musk, who publicly broke ranks with the president on the 'big, beautiful bill' after leaving his role with the Department of Governmental Efficiency initiative. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' the world's richest man posted on X, his social media site. 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' 'He's right,' Massie posted. 'I agree with Elon. We have both seen the massive waste in government spending and we know another $5 trillion in debt is a huge mistake,' Paul posted. 'We can and must do better.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
TotalEnergies in landmark greenwashing trial in France
Environmental groups took TotalEnergies to court Thursday in a landmark Paris trial, accusing the French oil and gas giant of misleading consumers with ads that overstate its climate commitments and fossil fuel transition. It is the first such case in France targeting a major energy company and could set a legal precedent for corporate environmental advertising, which is starting to face tighter regulations in the European Union. The civil case stems from a March 2022 lawsuit by three environmental groups accusing TotalEnergies of "misleading commercial practices" for saying it could reach carbon neutrality while continuing oil and gas production. The plaintiffs took that legal route as "greenwashing", or the act of claiming to be more environmentally responsible than in reality, is not specifically covered under French law. Starting in May 2021, TotalEnergies advertised its goal of "carbon neutrality by 2050" and touted gas as "the fossil fuel with the lowest greenhouse gas emissions". At the time, the company had changed its name from Total to TotalEnergies to emphasise its investments in wind turbines and solar panels for electricity production. The plaintiffs allege that TotalEnergies made around 40 "false advertisements" in their lawsuit. "For the average consumer, it is impossible to understand that TotalEnergies is actually expanding fossil fuel production," said Clementine Baldon, a lawyer for the NGOs. The company's strategy "will not help the energy transition", Baldon told the court. "It delays it, even prevents it, and it contributes to putting the objectives of the Paris accord at risk," she added, referring to the international agreement aimed at curbing climate change. TotalEnergies maintains it has not engaged in misleading commercial practices. Moreover, it insists that the messages are part of its institutional communications regulated by financial authorities and not consumer law. It has also argued the NGOs are misusing consumer protection rules to challenge its corporate strategy, and that no consumer organisation is party to the case. The NGOs said the Paris court will rule on the legality of ads presenting natural gas as essential to the energy transition. Climate experts say methane leaks from the gas industry have a powerful warming effect on the atmosphere. - Correcting ads - Environmental groups in recent years have turned to the courts to establish case law on companies misleading consumers by appearing more eco-friendly than they are. In Europe, courts ruled against Dutch airline KLM in 2024 and Germany's Lufthansa in March over misleading consumers about their efforts to reduce the environmental impact of flying. In Spain, utility Iberdrola failed to secure a conviction against Spanish oil and gas company Repsol over similar allegations of "false" environmental claims. A greenwashing case against Australian oil and gas producer Santos, challenging its claim to be a "clean fuels" company, has been ongoing since 2021. Other fossil fuel companies, under pressure from advertising regulators or legal complains, have had to scrap or correct ad campaigns. Shell, for example, received a warning in the UK and had to stop promoting "carbon-neutral" gasoline in several countries, including Germany, the Netherlands and Canada. New European laws now ban vague, generic environmental claims such as "green" or "100 percent natural" product, and aim to require brands to more strictly substantiate environmental claims on labels and in advertising. TotalEnergies has said it plans to show that its messages "about its name change, strategy and role in the energy transition are reliable and based on objective, verifiable data". nal/ak/lth/rl
