Cabinet appears ready to scrap cuts to WW and WIA
Budget negotiations are opening the way for a new agreement, but no formal decision has yet been made.
.jpg){kind=link}
The cabinet appears willing to scrap the planned cuts to WW and WIA in full. That is what talks with opposition parties suggest, although the official budget documents currently state only that several measures are being postponed.
The new development centres on the difference between postponement and cancellation. In the 2027 budget, the cabinet says various social security measures will be delayed by a year. The shortening of the WW duration and the higher benefit in the first two months have been pushed back to 1 January 2029.
The cabinet is also abandoning a reduction in the maximum daily wage. Other measures, including compensation for employers in cases of long-term illness, have not been scrapped according to the budget, but temporarily postponed. The cabinet says it wants to create room for talks with employers, trade unions and opposition parties.
PRO leader Jesse Klaver previously said that his party is willing to discuss reform of the WIA, but only without a savings target set in advance. According to Klaver, the aim should be to help people more effectively and prevent incapacity for work, not to cut benefits by billions in advance.
Prime Minister Rob Jetten said after the cabinet meeting that the cabinet and opposition will have to meet each other halfway. He acknowledged that parties cannot begin negotiations with their full programmes intact. He gave no details about the precise contents of a new budget offer.
The issue is politically important because the coalition of D66, VVD and CDA does not have a majority in the Lower House. With PRO's support, the cabinet can form a majority there. In the Senate, that support is almost sufficient, meaning that additional agreements will also remain necessary there.
For PRO, the emphasis is on income security and preventing people with a disability from being worse off. The VVD and other right-wing parties, by contrast, point to the sustainability of public finances and the importance of incentives to work. A possible compromise could consist of reforms to implementation without a pre-set amount of savings.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The budget postpones various social security measures.
- The coalition needs opposition support for budget majorities.
- PRO wants to discuss WIA reform without a savings amount being set in advance.
Left
Arguments WW and WIA are collective insurance schemes financed jointly by employees and employers. Cuts increase the insecurity of people who become unemployed or incapacitated for work; reforms should therefore focus on better guidance and greater income security.
Values Solidarity, protection against social risks and a strong welfare state.
Consequences Scrapping the cuts could protect households, but would require revenue or savings elsewhere.
Centre
Arguments The WIA has genuine implementation problems and needs to be improved, but a broadly supported solution requires consultation with the social partners and parliamentary backing. A compromise could combine reforms with protection of existing rights.
Values Administrative stability, practicability and broad support.
Consequences An agreement could bring calm, but prolonged talks could delay necessary reforms.
Right
Arguments Social security must remain affordable and must not discourage people from working. Without structural savings, the burden on workers and future generations will increase; reforms should therefore also limit inflows and make work pay more.
Values Financial responsibility, personal responsibility and economic incentives.
Consequences Maintaining the cuts could improve public finances, but could also hit people in a vulnerable position in the labour market hard.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The formal budget measures and political positions can be found in government and NOS sources. The possible complete scrapping of the cuts is explicitly presented as room for negotiation, not as a decision already taken.
- confirmed The shortening of the WW duration has been postponed until 1 January 2029. — This is stated in the Dutch government's explanation of the SZW budget. source
- confirmed The cabinet is abandoning a reduction in the maximum daily wage. — The measure is explicitly mentioned in the official budget explanation. source
- confirmed PRO wants to discuss WIA reform without a savings target being set in advance. — This is the essence of NOS reporting on Jesse Klaver's position. source
- confirmed The coalition does not have a majority in the Lower House. — NOS describes PRO's support as necessary for a majority. source
- confirmed A formal decision to scrap all the cuts has not yet been made public. — The official budget documents refer to postponement and consultation, not complete cancellation. source
Editor's note
The official budget confirms the postponement of several measures, but not their complete scrapping. The willingness to do so is based on reporting about the negotiations and political statements; the exact new offer has not been made public.Sources
- Prinsjesdag 2026: maatregelen op het gebied van SZW — Rijksoverheid
- Letterlijke tekst persconferentie na ministerraad 18 september 2026 — Rijksoverheid
- PRO wil onderhandelen over WIA-hervorming, maar zonder bezuinigingsdoel — NOS
- Jesse Klaver bereid te praten over begroting, maar hekelt rommeltje van kabinet — RTL Nieuws
More on this in Dutch media
- de Volkskrant — „wia sociale zekerheid”
- RTL Nieuws — „wia sociale zekerheid”
- NOS — „wia sociale zekerheid”