26th Session of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities – 25 to 27 March 2014

Local and regional democracy in the Netherlands

Statement by Artur TORRES PERREIRA, Co-Rapporteur of the Congress

Dear Colleagues,

As Mr Liouville has said, there is much that is praiseworthy in how local government works in the Netherlands. Now let’s look at what needs improvement.

The very first requirement of our Charter is the recognition of the principle of local self-government in law. I am talking about Article 2.  In the Netherlands, this principle is not explicitly mentioned either in the Constitution or in the applicable domestic legislation which is the Municipalities Act.  This is a gap that needs to be filled in my opinion. We know that the system functions in practice, we know that implicitly the principle of subsidiarity is working in favour of decentralization through the general powers granted. What we are saying is that legal safeguards are important for the day when it might not function as we want it to. 

Another subject on which we take issue with the Dutch authorities is the lack of clarity concerning the competences of municipalities and provinces.  Provinces have progressively lost competences and financial means, while municipalities have become stronger and bigger with extended capabilities. We believe that some sort of balance needs to be reinstated in this process of decentralization: the level of competences for provinces should be reinforced so that the decentralisation does not benefit only municipalities.

A third point concerns the co-governance mechanism called the Medebewind.  This can be summarized as local authorities working jointly with other public authorities to carry out central government instructions.  They are obliged to deliver services that are regulated by the central authority. In our opinion, this curbs the local authorities’ capacity to act and to take decisions. It leaves no margin for policy-making to local authorities. Local councilors told us that, in recent times, the number and importance of tasks to be accomplished under this system have increased sharply. So the problem is all the more pressing.

Then we have the issue of consultation. The mechanisms of consultation with municipal and provincial authorities, particularly during the process of planning and decision-making in matter affecting them, are apparently not functioning well. The Council of State has stated in its periodic report that when legislation is being prepared, the duty of consultation is regularly ignored. In fact they titled it, and I quote, “It can be done better”. And that is what we propose.

The issue of inadequate financial resources comes up for the Netherlands as well. Local authorities are dependent on State transfers. The local taxation reform has limited the income of municipalities and provinces. The laws on municipal and provincial finances should be amended, in order to grant local authorities more autonomy, more “own resources and, of course, concomitant financing for delegated competences.

The final point of concern I want to mention is that, at present, the Dutch legal system does not grant local authorities any specific right to recourse to a judicial remedy in order to secure the free exercise of their powers. Therefore, legislation should be amended to recognise their right to stand in court in order to protect their interests and the very essence of local and regional autonomy.

Colleagues I now want to turn to our recommendations. Here is what we propose to the Dutch government as a course of action to improve local democracy in the Netherlands:

Colleagues, we ask you to approve this draft Recommendation. 

Thank you for your attention.