Now that the Spring Note 2025 is on table is, look we together with William Moorlag and Mark Dierikx, associés at Public Affairs, back to the entire process. With their years of experience in both the public domain and the politics offer William and Mark a unique perspective on the creation and the political of the Spring Note.
The importance of the Spring Note
What was once a boring, technical update of the budget has become a political happening of the first order. "Over the years, the Spring Memorandum has become much more than a technical update," indicated William. "Increasingly, it is a complete rebuilding of the budget, driven by rapid economic change, purchasing power policy, government finances and geopolitical tensions." This year, he said, is no exception: the climate challenge, nitrogen issues and developments in international trade are putting significant pressure on budget rates. Moreover, William says that since 2022, the Spring Memorandum has more explicitly taken on the function of a financial outlook for the coming year. "In fact, the Spring Memorandum is already priming the 2026 budget." This is because the government must report and justify to the European Commission by June 1 in the Spring Memorandum how the national debt (EMU debt) and the budget deficit (EMU balance) will develop below the agreed ceilings in the coming years. In this Spring Memorandum, this is ample and creates political tension.
Mark also emphasizes the changing nature of the Spring Note. According to him, it has "always been a technical exercise and to some extent remains so today.". Still, he notes that this edition was exceptionally politically charged. Whereas the 2025 budget on Budget Day was effectively a continuation of the outline agreement, the new ministers could not develop their own understanding until the fall of 2024. "Because this coalition in late 2024 and early 2025 delayed a lot of decision-making until the Spring Memorandum, an unprecedented amount of political pressure suddenly came to bear on the conversations around the Spring Memorandum," Mark indicated, "That's pretty unusual." Remarkably, he said, the finance minister ended up holding the reins tight, leaving little room for policy changes. The result is a collection of mostly minor adjustments. "Actually, we could have seen this coming," Mark said. He said it is not surprising that many major files have been pushed forward to the summer of 2025, since it is not until Budget Day 2025 that the cabinet can really present its first budget of its own.
Creation of the Spring Note
Where once the Chamber could technically control, it is now mostly a spectator of political deals made elsewhere. "Important choices this time were made primarily by the group chairs of the coalition parties," William tells us. "Not by the cabinet itself." This has led to policies of questionable quality, with William citing the ill-conceived rent freeze as an example, evaporating the investment capacity of housing associations. "The political maxim: 'the government governs, parliament controls' has been violated by this," he said., William said. The laborious decision-making process resulted in a fragile compromise, in which mainly the short-term wishes of the coalition parties were served. The long-term approach to green industrial policy and the necessary reduction of nitrogen emissions, among other things, suffered as a result.
Mark also recognizes this picture: "Ministers were not present during the final decision-making process." The Spring Memorandum 2025 was the product of the finance minister and the four party leaders, with even the prime minister appearing to be only indirectly involved. It was precisely because the party leaders remained in the House of Representatives and were not in the Cabinet as usual that this was able to happen. "This is called extra-parliamentary, but it is not." What is unusual is that only the Minister of Climate and Green Growth, and to a lesser extent the Minister of LVVN, had a position of their own, because they were allowed to come up with a separate policy brief and were at the helm themselves. According to Mark, the KGG minister did have one clear constraint: no additional resources!
What could have been done better?
According to William, part of the problem lies in the lack of long-term vision. The Cabinet currently has little authority and operates within the confines of a shaky and fragmented coalition, which is primarily concerned with day-to-day political dynamics. William argues that to formulate answers to the big long-term issues, the cabinet would be wise to engage in broad collaboration with science, business and civil society organizations. In this way, the problem-solving capacity from within society is used to find answers, outside the full light of the spotlight. Or as William also puts it, "Classic poldering!". Moreover, this approach is already being used in labor migration through advice from the SER and an Interdepartmental Policy Survey, the results of which are expected by summer. "Possibly this will lay the basis for coherent policy."
Mark also mentions the lack of long-term vision and also wonders if coherence between measures has been considered at all. Has feasibility been taken into account, especially now that official capacity must shrink by 22%? Are mutual effects in view? Many of the calculations of the effects of measures are only now going to take place, which Mark says makes discussion with the opposition uncomfortable. For the climate measures, for example, it will only become clear in the fall, at the KEV, whether the CO2 reduction targets in 2030 and 2035 remain feasible. However, it is already clear that Minister Hermans' estimate, in which 10 to 12 additional megatonnes of CO2 reduction will take place, seems insufficient to sufficiently improve the chances of meeting these targets.
Notable changes
According to Mark, it was striking that the process surrounding the Spring Memorandum seems to have been used primarily to offer each coalition party something for its own constituency. "It seems that there was no broader negotiation to ensure that there is sufficient support in the Lower and Upper Houses in particular." Mark does not see much room to adjust the content of the Spring Memorandum in either the House of Representatives or the Senate. Every effort will have to be made to ensure the implementation of the decisions taken. Whereas implementation tests are mandatory for legislative proposals, this is not the case for a document like the Spring Memorandum.
Nitrogen
One of the things that has stood out most this year, according to William, is the handling of the nitrogen issue. Or rather, the lack of real choices. "Instead of a breakthrough, the cabinet presents nothing more than a 'starter package,'" William noted disappointedly. Despite five years of discussion and clear recommendations from the Remkes Commission in 2020, the cabinet remains stuck in half-measures. William even compared the approach to Michael Jackson's Moonwalk: energetically taking steps without moving from your spot. Experts also say the starter package offers no assurance that permitting will actually get off the ground. "The cabinet now delivers in the starter package nothing more than a faintly warmed-up mash-up, which - according to the opinion of the country's lawyer - provides no certainty whatsoever that the licensing process will 'get off the lock'." Farmers, especially so-called PAS reporters, thus remain in limbo. Businesses also keep waiting, causing the Netherlands to lose investments that are desperately needed for economic and sustainable growth.
Climate measures
There is also a double feeling among William about the additional climate measures. The need to address the climate crisis is crystal clear. At the same time, energy-intensive industries are struggling with a dramatically deteriorating competitive position. William illustrates the dilemma of choosing between either the demise of strategically important industry or temporizing climate policy. "The cabinet is skirting," is how William succinctly summed it up. Positive though William is about the fact that the controversial plastic levy and standard are off the table for now, as they were detrimental to the competitive position of Dutch industry. "The Netherlands was too far ahead of European regulations," William explained. "As a result, production and associated employment would shift abroad." The question does remain as to how the freed-up financial tasking will now be filled; the cabinet is pushing this forward to Budget Day. Until then, there is still room for public participation. "Positive is that the so-called Plastictable offers the industry the opportunity to influence this."
IBO Funding Electricity Infrastructure.
What was striking, according to Mark, was the slow impact of policy studies such as the IBO on the costing of electricity infrastructure. Although, according to Mark, there was a solid Cabinet response to this with an overview of new policy measures, the effects of many of these proposals were postponed until later in 2025. The Consumer & Market Authority (ACM) will also have the necessary workload with the further elaborations, according to Mark, as many topics still need "further consideration." "After social parties had looked forward to this IBO, the expectation now shifts to the autumn of 2025″, states Mark. Here he cites the possibility of amortizing the cost of building electricity infrastructure as an example where more will not be known until later in 2025. Mark also indicates that the concrete budget of 22.5 million euros for an expert pool, which should speed up procedures at decentralized authorities, sounds good, but is not operational overnight. "In short, although the IBO sounds good, it will take some time before concrete results emerge from it that really set new and different policies in motion." However, it is already clear that Climate Fund funds may not be used for this electricity infrastructure, despite suggestions from various parties, including the IBO preparers themselves.
What does the Spring Note mean in the short term?
According to Mark, we can already predict that in 2025 much will not yet be able to come to fruition from the Spring Memorandum. This is because all the discussion in parliament will only take place just before the summer recess and, because the Spring Memorandum must first be fully debated and approved, the civil service will not be able to take any implementation steps now. So Mark tells us: "Preparatory work can of course be done but making financial commitments requires approved budgets and that will be June." To illustrate the possible consequences of not approving the Spring Memorandum, both Mark and William brought up the example of the fall of the Rutte I cabinet in the spring of 2012. That was when negotiations on the Spring Memorandum stalled, after which the PVV withdrew its tacit support for the CDA/VVD cabinet. "There too, negotiations were tough, with a large austerity bill as a difference from now, but the PVV eventually withdrew as a tolerance partner." Like this year, the negotiations in the Catshuis, between Prime Minister Rutte, Deputy Prime Minister Verhagen and PVV party leader Wilders, took place outside the usual involvement of cabinet ministers and official support. After the cabinet fell in April, under intense pressure the FIN minister concluded "the spring agreement" with a new majority in both chambers without PVV support. "Officially, at the time, that actually provided the space to continue working, despite the Cabinet's caretaker status," states Mark. Consequently, this spring agreement became the basis for the 2013 budget, William adds.
The coming period until the summer recess is dominated by the debate on the Spring Memorandum, after which discussions on the 2026 budget will immediately begin, to be completed by mid-August. Just as after 2012 the Spring Notes again became mostly technical updates without much political content, Mark's hope is that this year, too, the political turbulence surrounding the Spring Note will remain a one-off and the budget cycle will be restored with Budget Day as the time for new policy proposals.
What is certain is that the Spring Memorandum 2025 was not only a financial snapshot, but also a sharp reflection of the administrative tensions and strategic choices that the country will surely have to make in the coming years.
William has been an associate at Publieke Zaken since May 2021. His previous positions include FNV executive, deputy in Groningen, and Member of Parliament, where he was spokesman for Economic Affairs and Climate, Agriculture and Nature, among others. At Publieke Zaken , he helps organizations connect and move forward with his broad experience, focusing on major transitions such as energy, agriculture and raw materials.
Mark began his career as an organic chemist, but switched to the central government in the 1980s. Until his retirement in 2019, he held various top positions within Economic Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Transport & Water Management and the Interior, among others. This makes him a valuable sparring partner as an associate at Publieke Zaken for questions on industrial policy, energy, mobility, and government relations, among others.
