On 21 March 2018, Amsterdammers will elect a new city council and district committees. Foreigners living in Amsterdam may be eligible to vote, check here for details.
If you want to find out how the positions of local parties compare to your own views, take the test below. You can give your opinion on a series of proposals the city council voted on in 2017. At the end of the test, a chart will show which parties you agree with most often. See also the disclaimer below.
Organise the Uitmarkt (the festival marking the start of the cultural season) by turns in the peripheral districts of Zuidoost, Noord and Nieuw-West
For: The city centre is crowded; this will stimulate the development of other parts of the city. Against: It’s not up to the city council but the organisers of the Uitmarkt to decide where the festival is held.
Voted for: CDA, GroenLinks, Partij van de Ouderen, Partij voor de Dieren, SP. Voted against: D66, PvdA, VVD.
Force the municipal transportation company GVB to do something about excessive remuneration
For: The GVB refuses to abide by the city policy; the entire management board receives a remuneration that exceeds the norm set by the city council. Against: It has been tried to find a solution that is acceptable to both the GVB and the city government and that is a transition period of seven years.
Voted for: GroenLinks, Partij voor de Dieren, PvdA, SP. Voted against: CDA, D66, VVD.
Stop selling and liberalising houses owned by housing corporations in areas where less than 35% of housing is affordable rent
For: In the interest of diversity, the share of affordable rent should not be further reduced in these neighbourhoods. Against: We should liberalise housing in the area within the ring road and sell affordable rental houses in peripheral parts of the city.
Voted for: GroenLinks, Partij van de Ouderen, Partij voor de Dieren, PvdA, SP. Voted against: CDA, D66, VVD.
Set the minimum charge for ground leases from the city at 1.6% instead of 3%
For: This is more respectful of acquired rights. Against: Especially owners of hotels and offices will benefit. City income will decrease, which means less money for for example health care or other social services.
Voted for: CDA, D66, Partij voor de Dieren, VVD. Voted against: GroenLinks, Partij van de Ouderen, PvdA, SP.
Don’t contract with home care providers that violate the collective labour agreement
For: Some home care providers don’t pay staff according to the wage scale that applies to the type of work they do. Against: If the city cancels a contract with a home care provider that violates the collective labour agreement, workers may lose their job.
Voted for: CDA, D66, GroenLinks, Partij voor de Dieren, PvdA, SP. Voted against: VVD.
Provide lockers where the homeless can store personal belongings during the day
For: Homeless people who don’t know yet where they will spend the night have no place to store their belongings during the day. Against: One shouldn’t ‘reward’ the homeless until they participate in a programme.
Voted for: CDA, GroenLinks, Partij van de Ouderen, PvdA, SP. Voted against: D66, VVD.
This test is not intended as a replacement for independent thinking and investigation.
The statements are based on proposals the city council voted on in 2017, and the arguments for and against that were used. Of course, these short summaries can never entirely do justice to the debate in the city council. Therefore, each statement comes with a link to the report of the city council meeting in which the proposal was discussed (only in Dutch; unfortunately the council information system is not very user friendly - click on the double red arrow below the video to open the entire page).
The Party for the Animals and the Party of the Elderly are missing from the calculated score. This is because these parties missed some of the votes.
Sometimes, parties vote for a proposal they disagree with or vice versa, for example because of the coalition agreement. This might distort the outcome. Therefore, only proposals are included on wich coalition parties voted differently: apparently parties were not bound by the coalition agreement on these issues.