News from Amsterdam


To the front page

11/1 Jurists want to stay in Oudemanhuispoort

8/2 Mayor’s portrait

8/2 Websites for social cohesion

7/2 Spreading tourism proceeds with difficulty

7/2 GroenLinks on districts: Be a man

6/2 Zuideramstel opens new office on Sabbath

5/2 The truth about integration

4/2 Wilders has little support on Amsterdam

3/2 Elite involved in neighbourhood

2/2 Johnnie Walker avoids taxes in Amsterdam

1/2 Rotterdam to tinker with district councils as well

31/1 Wooden rowing boats to disappear from Amstel

31/1 ZeeburgTV launched

27/1 Privacy activists to mess up loyalty card system

27/1 A few were still coughing, but that was an act

27/1 Chrisis in de Baarsjes

26/1 Youth have positive view of districts

24/1 Action groups call for Carmel and Jaffa boycott

24/1 PvdA members dismiss plan for districts

23/1 KLM takes on crisis with new uniform

23/1 District office not squatted

21/1 Merge districts

20/1 Closing squat bar Vrankrijk not necessary

20/1 Cleaners welcome new Schiphol director

18/1 Palestine at the Jewish Historical Museum

18/1 What is the right size for a district?

17/1 PvdA Oost against fewer districts

16/1 Committee: 7 districts by 2010

15/1 Soldiers may attend Afghanistan debate after all

15/1 Bait bike leads to arrest

14/1 Youth for Christ to republish vacancies

13/1 Paintings of the Zuidas

13/1 New Youth for Christ contoversy

11/1 Social cohesion initiative raises eyebrows

10/1 Fewer districts in 2010

10/1 Zuidas: People feel that we are losers

9/1 Fun on the ice - but not for all

9/1 Supermarket coupon fraud thwarted

9/1 I Amsterdam must remain exclusive

8/1 Use term Apartheid in every discussion

8/1 No city kiosk in Amsterdam yet

7/1 Snow

7/1 Fatima Elatik to run Zeeburg

7/1 Municipal managers to return to shop floor

4/1 Police: take photo of strange people

3/1 Gaza protest criticises politicians

1/1 Thousands to protest against attacks on Gaza

1/1 Mustapha Laboui leaves district council

 

2008 Archive

2007 Archive

2006 Archive

2005 Archive

 

 

 

 

Ethnic votes crucial in Amsterdam election

8 March 2006 – Turnout among Turks and Moroccans was higher than usual in yesterday’s municipal and district elections. Likely, they were motivated by the harsher social climate in the Netherlands. Their votes helped the social-democrat PvdA party win 20 out of 45 seats in the city council, which is five more than four years ago.

The Socialist SP party also won. Losers were the right-wing parties as well as a number of local parties. The PvdA’s victory can be explained largely as a protest against the policies of the right-wing national government. However, some of it is also due to higher turnout among ethnic minorities, eighty percent of whom voted PvdA.

At city-level, it is expected that the PvdA will form a left-wing local government with green party GroenLinks. Slotervaart will have the first Muslim district chairman, Ahmed Marcouch.

The ethnic vote has been even more important in Rotterdam, where minorities helped the PvdA win a victory over Leefbaar Rotterdam, the party that has been founded by Pim Fortuyn. The Rotterdam government was seen by many as an example of tougher policies.

The social climate in the Netherlands has changed since the murders of right-wing politician Pim Fortuyn in May 2002, and film-maker Theo van Gogh in November 2004. The government has assumed a harsh and sometimes hostile attitude towards minorities, especially Muslims.

The Forum Multicultural Institute investigated the voting behaviour of ethnic minorities. “Perhaps they will not vote, in order to give off a signal. Or perhaps they will vote, to show that they reject the current integration policies”, the Institute’s Chris Huinder said prior to the elections.

He expected organisations of ethnic minorities to become quite active during the election campaign. “At the time of the 2003 national elections especially, minorities felt cornered as a result of the murder of Fortuyn. At present, they are a bit more assertive again”.

According to a survey carried out by the University of Amsterdam, turnout among Turks rose from 30 to 44%, and among Moroccans from 22 to 35% in Amsterdam. In contrast, turnout among people from Surinam and the Antilles decreased slightly from 26 to 24%.

Turnout among minorities in local elections in Amsterdam and Rotterdam (source: Imes)

 

A'dam

 

 

 

R'dam

 

 

 

 

1994

1998

2002

2006

1994

1998

2002

2006

Turks

67

39

30

44

28

42

53

47

Moroccans

49

23

22

35

23

33

39

55

Sur / Ant

30

21

26

24

24

25

31

51

entire city

57

46

48

51

57

49

55

58

In previous elections, turnout among minorities had been decreasing in Amsterdam. In Rotterdam, on the contrary, it has been on the rise since 1994, when immigrants obtained the right to vote in local elections. According to some researchers, the explanation is that Rotterdam continued to subsidise ethnic organisations until recently, which would have had a positive impact on turnout.

Others point to a number of successful voter mobilisation campaigns that have been carried out in Rotterdam in the past. This year, activities have been carried out throughout the country. For example, a national coalition of ethnic organisations planned to organise 120 local activities to boost turnout.

The Amsterdam districts also carried out activities to get people to vote. Their joint budget for such activities was 300,000 euros. Osdorp had the highest budget of 62,000 euros. De Baarsjes stood out for the intensive way in which local community organisations were involved in voter mobilisation.

Turnout in districts (source: O+S)

 

2002

2006

change

Bos en Lommer

37,0

48,0

11,0

Westerpark

43,0

51,4

8,4

De Baarsjes

43,1

51,1

8,0

Zeeburg

48,7

55,9

7,2

Oud-West

49,2

55,7

6,5

Oost

49,3

55,5

6,2

Zuidoost

40,5

46,4

5,9

Noord

43,3

48,9

5,6

Centrum

51,8

56,5

4,7

Osdorp

46,6

50,3

3,7

Oud Zuid

52,2

55,6

3,4

Slotervaart

49,8

53,0

3,2

ZuiderAmstel

54,6

57,6

3,0

Geuzenveld

42,9

45,7

2,8

Meanwhile, the minister responsible for democratic reform, Mr. Alexander Pechtold, is critical of efforts to improve turnout in disadvantaged neighbourhoods. He argues that such initiatives could be interpreted as ‘manipulating the elections’. In fact, he is planning a number of reforms that may have a negative impact on turnout in future elections.

For example, the government wants to spread local elections over multiple dates. This will likely depress turnout, perhaps even by tens of percentage points. When municipalities have to hold elections on divergent dates due to municipal mergers, as was recently the case in a number of municipalities, turnout can be as much as twenty percentage points below normal.

More: voter mobilisation in districts, background information on voter mobilisation

The above article has been updated since the publication of the final results from most districts

This is the old website. Please find new content here