Volt Amsterdam’s response to the 2026-2030 coalition agreement

Image: Sem van der Wal/ANP

We congratulate PRO Amsterdam and D66 Amsterdam on the coalition agreement. The agreement contains positive steps. It takes a critical look at the municipality’s own organisation, works towards an agenda to strengthen the position of women, and commits to a municipality that stands alongside residents rather than opposite them.

But this agreement does not provide answers on every point. More and more young people are wondering whether there is still room in their own city to build a future.

For young people, finding an affordable home has become too difficult. Hardly any new homes are being built, thousands of homes are disappearing from the market, and many young people live without a rental contract and therefore without rights. That this coalition chooses to do nothing about house sharing, the biggest frustration among this group, is therefore incomprehensible. If you say that young people deserve a place in Amsterdam, you must also dare to relax the rules on house sharing. Thousands of rooms are standing empty, and with this agreement, that will remain the case.

It is also clear that this coalition has not managed to agree on whether it wants to build according to the 40-40-20 or 30-40-30 model. Report after report shows that complete neighbourhoods are not being built. Either facilities are missing, or homes are being built that no one wants to live in. The proposed Building Agenda, which we do not know how long we will have to wait for, feels like postponing the most important problem of our time. This coalition must make a firm choice instead of finding a watered-down middle ground.

We also see many fine words about a humane government, equal opportunities and livelihood security. But here too, the ambition could be greater. PRO and D66 choose to simplify minimum-income schemes, introduce a benefits check and reduce unnecessary burden of proof. Those are steps forward, but for us they are not enough. We want the municipality to simply grant benefits automatically, as is done in Ghent, to place the burden of proof on itself, and to work towards one basic amount for families instead of the jungle of schemes we have now. We are also concerned by the cuts to the Wmo and youth care. That is at odds with the promise of being a humane government that provides livelihood security.

In the coming years, major cuts will be made to the municipality’s own organisation. According to the agreement, the municipality must shrink by as much as 20% in the coming years. As far as Volt is concerned, it is good that we take a critical look at our own organisation. Where it is possible to cut unnecessary bureaucracy, management layers and meeting structures, we should do so.

But we are left with questions about what this cut will mean in practice. It is unclear what this 20% is based on, and where it will be felt most. How do we know that this reduction is possible, and how do we ensure that it will not ultimately come at the expense of services for Amsterdammers?

What surprises us, finally, is that our international community is not mentioned at all. While this group was often addressed directly during the campaign, including by PRO and D66, we now see that they have been forgotten. It gives the impression that they were mainly seen as an attractive target group for extra votes, rather than as a full part of our city.

We are glad that there is an agreement, but Amsterdam needs more than good intentions. In the coming years, Volt will work to make this agreement more progressive and more future-oriented; that is what the next generation deserves.

For more information, interviews or clarification, please contact:

Daan Vellema
Press Officer Volt Amsterdam
E: [email protected]
T: +31 6 16 10 33 21