Elections in the Netherlands

The electorate in the Netherlands during the last general elections on the 17th of March 2021 was 13,293,186, of whom 78,7% voted, resulting in 10,462,677 votes (of which 10,422,852 valid votes). With 150 seats, that means a quota of 69,485 votes per seat, the so-called Hare quota. Since the election threshold is equal to the quota, that is also the number of votes required to get one seat in the House of Representatives.

However, the way residual seats are assigned, by using the D'Hondt method, a highest averages method, means that smaller parties are unlikely to get a residual seat, while larger parties have a bigger chance of getting one and may even get more than one. Firstly, numbers of seats are always rounded down, meaning there are always residual seats and parties that did not reach the quota do not get any seats (they do not take part in the following calculation). Next, the number of votes is divided by the assigned seats plus one. The party with the highest resulting number then gets one extra seat. Next, the process is repeated, with the party that got the extra seat participating again, albeit with a number one higher because they got an extra seat (the calculation stays the same for the other parties, which got no extra seat). But later on in the process, that party may get another extra seat. And since there are many parties in the House of Representatives, this is not unlikely to happen.

For example, in 2003 (see table here), the three biggest parties each got two of the six residual seats, even the VVD (150*0.179=26.85, but they got 28 seats, representing 18.7% of the seats instead of 17.9%), whereas the Socialist Party got none (150*0.063 = 9.45, but they got only 9 seats, representing 6% of the seats instead of 6.3%).

When the largest party gets over 35% of the votes and is considerably bigger than the next biggest party, that party may even get as much as 3 or even 4 residual seats. This has, however, never happened. The percentage of votes for the biggest party is usually around 30% and rarely goes far beyond that. The largest result ever was at the 1989 elections, when the Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) got 35.3% of the votes. Even then, however, CDA only got two residual seats because next biggest party, the Labour Party (PvdA) had 31.9% of the votes. The biggest difference between the first and second party was at the 2002 elections, the most dramatic elections in Dutch history, when especially the PvdA lost many votes to the Pim Fortuyn List (LPF), which became second biggest after CDA with 17.0% of the votes. CDA, however, had received only 27.9% of the votes and was therefore still only assigned two residual seats.

Historically, parties had the option of forming an electoral alliance (lijstverbinding), in which case they would participate in the above calculations as one party and therefore increase their chance of being assigned residual seats. The allocation of those seats among the parties within a lijstverbinding was, however, done using the largest remainder method, which is more favourable toward smaller parties rather than the bigger ones if there is a considerable difference in size. But the overall advantage was greatest for small parties of comparable size. The option of forming a lijstverbinding was abolished in 2017.[10]

After seats are allocated to the parties, candidates have to be assigned to the seats. For the purpose of general elections, the Netherlands is divided into twenty electoral districts. Parties can present different lists in each district. In theory, a party can place different candidates on each of the 20 different lists. However, it is usual that at least the candidate ranked first on the list is the same person throughout the country. It is even quite common that parties use the same list in every district, or vary only the last five candidates per district. Usually these five candidates are locally well known politicians, parties hope to attract extra votes with these candidates. However, because of their low position on the list, chances are low that these local candidates are elected.

The first step in the process of assigning people to the seats is calculating how many seats each of the different lists of a party gets, by adding the number of votes on each of the different lists together. If a party used the same list in more than one electoral district, these lists are seen as one list. Seat assignment to the different lists is done by using the largest remainder method.

The second step is calculating which candidate received on his or her own more votes than 25% of the electoral quota, by adding up all votes for a particular candidate on the different lists. These candidates are declared elected independent of the list order, and get one of the seats of the list where they received the most votes. If more candidates are elected on a list than the list received seats, the candidate with the lowest total number of votes is transferred to the list where he had his second best result.

As a third step, the remaining seats (if there are any) are assigned to the remaining candidates, based on their order on the list. When candidates are elected on more than one list in this way, the candidate gets the seat on the list where he or she received the most votes. This is continued until every seat is assigned. If one of these elected candidates later decides to leave parliament, then his seat is assigned to the next person on the list of the district he 'represents'.

An exception to the above exists in the form of lijstduwer ("list pushers"), famous people (former politicians, but also sports people) who are put on the candidate list but will not accept a seat when they get enough votes for one. During the municipal elections in 2006 professor Joop van Holsteyn criticised this practise, saying someone on a candidate list should also be a serious candidate. This view is shared by other political scientists, but less so by politicians, who say that lijstduwers are on the list not to get elected but to show that they support that party and that the fact that they are at the bottom of the list makes it obvious they are not intended to get a seat. Still, writer Ronald Giphart (1998) and skater Hilbert van der Duim (1994) got a municipal council seat, which Giphart refused to fill. Professor Rudy Andeweg says this is close to fraud because the law requires someone on the candidate list to declare in writing to be willing to fill a seat.

An example from the municipality of Oude IJsselstreek. The city council elections of 2010 resulted a total of 17,852 valid votes. The CDA party achieved 4,440 votes. Of the thirty CDA candidates on the list, 22 were given at least one vote each:[11]

1. van de Wardt, P. 2061
2. Aalbers-van Ham, A.A.F.J. 224
3. Steentjes, B.W.J. 451
4. Bergevoet, R.J.W.M. 245
5. Tekinerdoğan, M. 417
6. Ermers-Mulder, A.G.M. 66
7. Hettinga, M.A.J. 99
8. Toussaint, C.P. 29
9. van Bergen, J.H. 37
10. Berentschot, H.J. 77
11. Hendriksen-Löverink, S.A.M. 150
12. Büchner, A.C.A. 31
13. Sorgedrager-Carreira da Cunha Sant'Anna Sorgedrager, M.P. 22
14. Hakvoort, G.W.M. 219
15. Lammers-te Lindert, E.H.A. 19
16. Vesters, J.M.G.M. 28
17. Rootmensen-Bulsink, J.W. 45
18. Ross, A.G.M. 59
19. Koskamp, A.H. 35
20. Roelofs, W.T.H.M. 91
21. Ernst, F.F.J. 15
22. Löverink, B.A.S. 20

(The last number is the number of personal votes.)

As the total number of votes in the municipality is 17,852 and the council has 27 seats, 661 votes count for one seat. As the CDA has 4,440 votes it is entitled to seven seats.

First, it has to be checked who of the CDA candidates has more than a quarter of the kiesdeler. (661 divided by four makes 165 votes.) This is true for the candidates number 1, 3, 5, 4, 2 and 14 (in this order). Those six are elected.

Second, the rest of the CDA seats (one) is given to the person first on the list. As candidates number 1-5 already have seats, this last seat goes to number 6.

Elections for the water boards have some similarities to other elections mentioned above, but also some distinctive differences. Similar to municipal elections, there are national parties and local parties, and the party list system is used with proportional representation. Residents of 18 and over can vote and elections take place every four years.

In contrast to other elections, not all members of the water board are chosen by the residents of the water board area. The members of each water board are divided into four categories: inhabitants, agriculture, nature and commercial. Only board members in the inhabitants category are chosen in direct elections, the members in the other categories are appointed by representing organisations, e.g. chambers of commerce in the commercial category. Since 2015, residents vote in person, just like in other elections, and they take place every four years, on the same day as the provincial elections. Before 2015, votes were cast by post, over a period of about two weeks.

The elections for the Island councils for the special municipalities of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, and Saba take place at the same date as the provincial elections;[12] for the first time in 2015.

The Senate is elected indirectly, by the provincial councillors (who are themselves chosen in direct elections) and (in Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba) the electoral colleges for the Senate.

In the 2023 provincial elections, BBB won a majority in all provinces.