The decline of the Netherlands driven by consensus and compromise as core traits of Dutch officials

The rise of the job carousel

A closed system of recycled officials

The Netherlands, once praised for its pragmatic governance, has increasingly become a bureaucratic stronghold where incompetence is not punished but institutionalized. Instead of selecting officials based on courage, integrity, and track records, the political system favors those who know how to navigate the internal game. A phenomenon known as the job carousel has emerged, a process through which the same group of insiders rotate endlessly between key positions in government, semi-public institutions, regulatory agencies, and advisory bodies. This culture, deeply rooted in the Dutch “poldermodel,” prioritizes consensus and compromise above accountability and results. It creates a situation where no one is ever truly responsible, yet everyone keeps moving upward (De poldermodel en bestuurlijke inertie, Peter Giesen).

Public interest replaced by careerism

This job carousel rewards survival instinct and loyalty to the system over service to the public. Wouter Bos, former PvdA leader and Finance Minister during the financial crisis, went on to lead VU Medical Center and later Invest-NL, a taxpayer-funded institution managing billions in capital (Invest-NL: het vehikel voor risico-arm staatskapitalisme, Follow the Money). Edith Schippers transitioned from Health Minister to a top executive role at DSM, a company impacted by her own policies. These transitions are not unique but part of a broader pattern in which political power is used to secure lucrative and influential follow-up positions. What is absent in this rotation is any connection to public approval, effectiveness, or moral responsibility. Instead, personal networks and ideological compliance are the key currencies.

The mechanism of self-preservation

Loyalty over competence

This system functions on the principle of mutual protection. Those who remain loyal to the rules of the inner circle are rewarded, regardless of outcome or damage to society. Challenging the group or demanding structural change is seen as disloyalty and can lead to exclusion. In this closed world, silence is golden and competence is irrelevant as long as loyalty is intact (Bestuur zonder verantwoording, Marcel ten Hooven).

Failure without consequences

Former State Secretary Menno Snel, who resigned over the massive childcare benefits scandal, is a textbook case. His resignation came only after intense pressure and public outcry, and he soon resurfaced as an advisor at the World Bank (Oud-staatssecretaris Menno Snel aan de slag bij Wereldbank, NOS). Despite being partly responsible for one of the worst injustices in Dutch administrative history, he faced no professional downfall. Instead, he landed softly into another prestigious position, proving once more that within the carousel, failure is merely a footnote.

Technocracy replaces democracy

As described by Marcel ten Hooven, the Dutch administrative state has become a technocracy where decisions are made by experts, bureaucrats, and consultants behind closed doors. Parliamentary oversight has diminished, and major policy decisions are increasingly formed in commissions, task forces, and networks disconnected from the average citizen. Ministers come and go, but the machinery underneath continues to run on autopilot, operated by career technocrats who answer to one another rather than the public (Bestuur zonder verantwoording, Marcel ten Hooven).

Cowardice as virtue

Avoidance of accountability

One of the most disturbing features of the carousel is its valorization of cowardice. Taking a principled stand, proposing bold reforms, or publicly admitting failure is seen not as leadership but as a liability. The most successful career officials are those who avoid controversy, defer decisions to endless studies, and hide behind procedure. They rarely express personal opinions, and when faced with criticism, they respond with vague bureaucratic jargon instead of concrete answers (Bureaucratie en bestuurlijke inertie, Paul Frissen).

Process over principle

The administrative system no longer values substance but process. Success is measured not by solving problems, but by properly managing the appearance of effort. Everything becomes a cycle of reporting, evaluation, pilot projects, and follow-up studies, but never actual change. The officials who master this process receive praise and promotions, while those who demand real action are sidelined or discredited (Bureaucratie en bestuurlijke inertie, Paul Frissen).

Complicity as survival

The culture of complicity runs deep. Officials know that today’s mistake could be tomorrow’s political time bomb, so they protect one another. As long as one remains silent and refrains from challenging others, one is guaranteed support in return. This cycle of mutual non-aggression creates a political ecosystem where no one dares rock the boat, and those who try are quickly neutralized or isolated (Het politieke web, Sander Heijne).

The citizen as invisible factor

Victims of policy without justice

The consequences for society are severe. Citizens become victims of administrative decisions made without oversight or empathy. The childcare benefits scandal left thousands of families in financial and psychological ruin, yet very few officials faced meaningful consequences. The earthquake damage in Groningen continues to be inadequately compensated. The housing crisis intensifies as policy shifts are endlessly debated but never implemented. All of these issues reflect a system that prioritizes internal order above public welfare (De onderste steen, Sander Heijne).

Citizens reduced to statistics

Citizens are treated as numbers in a spreadsheet rather than as people with rights and voices. Policy targets, key performance indicators, and efficiency metrics dominate decision-making. The actual experiences of citizens are either ignored or manipulated to fit official narratives. Those who protest are labeled as discontented minorities or extremists, and their concerns are rarely integrated into the policy cycle in a meaningful way (De onderste steen, Sander Heijne).

Discrediting of dissent

When citizens raise concerns, they are often framed as part of the problem rather than as democratic participants. Critical voices are dismissed as populist, radical, or anti-institutional. Instead of engaging with public dissatisfaction, the administrative system relies on media strategies, PR campaigns, and hollow “citizen dialogues” that serve to maintain the illusion of responsiveness while avoiding real debate or concessions (Het politieke web, Sander Heijne).

The administrative elite as a closed caste

Entrenched networks and revolving doors

A limited set of individuals dominates the public and semi-public spheres. These people often come from elite institutions and have careers that span ministries, academic think tanks, and corporate boards. Kajsa Ollongren, Ronald Plasterk, and Femke Halsema are examples of officials whose names appear repeatedly in different capacities regardless of public trust or performance. Their continuous presence ensures that the ideology of the ruling class remains unchallenged and immune to electoral consequences (Lobby in Daglicht, Alterra & Transparency International).

Exclusion of outsiders

True outsiders with independent backgrounds, contrarian views, or hands-on experience are systematically kept out of decision-making roles. Whether in local politics, civic movements, or the private sector, those who do not conform to the expected norms are excluded from the carousel. Appointments are made based on loyalty, familiarity, and predictability. Diversity of background or opinion is discouraged unless it serves symbolic purposes (Lobby in Daglicht, Alterra & Transparency International).

Institutionalizing failure

The same officials who preside over crises often return in different guises. A failed minister becomes an ombudsman. A discredited regulator is assigned a new EU portfolio. This endless recycling of personnel reinforces the impression that public service is a private career ladder rather than a civic duty. The signal to society is unmistakable: no matter how badly you perform, you can always fail upward if you know the right people (Lobby in Daglicht, Alterra & Transparency International).

The necessary break

Accountability and consequence

If the Netherlands is to recover from institutional decay, there must be a radical shift toward accountability. Officials should be evaluated based on concrete results and the social impact of their policies. When scandals emerge, resignations must be expected, not exceptional. Independent investigations should lead to real consequences, including disqualification from future public roles (Transparantie en verantwoordingsplicht, Sander Heijne).

End the revolving doors

There must be legal and ethical restrictions on post-government employment in sectors previously influenced by one’s public role. Ministers should not become consultants in the same industries they regulated. Civil servants should not draft policies for the benefit of future employers. The current system encourages corruption through indirect incentives, and this must be dismantled (Lobby in Daglicht, Alterra & Transparency International).

Make room for outsiders

Democracy needs people from outside the carousel. Individuals with practical experience, ethical courage, and no allegiance to elite consensus must be actively recruited and supported. This includes citizens, professionals, whistleblowers, and dissidents who can challenge the groupthink and stagnation that dominate current governance. Only then can the culture of protectionism and institutional self-interest be broken (Bestuur zonder verantwoording, Marcel ten Hooven).

Restore the citizen to the center

The government must serve its citizens, not manage them. Restoring this principle requires transparency, honesty, and open access to decision-making processes. Citizens must no longer be seen as data points but as human beings whose lives are directly affected by policy. The role of the citizen should be active, informed, and sovereign. Anything less is unworthy of a democratic state (De onderste steen, Sander Heijne).