Parliamentary questions after new figures on violence against rail staff
D66 asks the cabinet to explain thousands of reports of aggression at NS.
_-_Driebruggen-Hekendorp_(20607897939).jpg){kind=link}
D66 MP Dion Huidekooper has asked questions about rising aggression against railway staff. The trigger was a strongly worded letter from trade union VVMC, which cites 5,088 reports at NS during the first three quarters of 2026.
Huidekooper submitted the written questions to A.W.H. Bertram, State Secretary for Infrastructure and Water Management, on Tuesday. Among other things, he asks whether the State Secretary is familiar with VVMC’s letter of 25 September, titled ‘Derailing behaviour is not on track!’, and how the cabinet assesses the figures cited in it.
According to the figures cited in the parliamentary questions, NS recorded 5,088 reports of aggression and violence during the first three quarters of this year. Of these, 1,561 concerned threats, 1,368 physical violence and 105 threats involving a weapon. These are reports, not automatically the same number of individual perpetrators or incidents.
The figures fit a trend described by trade union FNV earlier this year. According to the union, the number of serious incidents involving NS employees rose from 1,043 in 2023 to 1,095 in 2024 and 1,132 in 2025. FNV called for more powers for special investigating officers (boa’s) in public transport and a tougher approach to violence against staff.
Railway unions are also reporting problems regionally. A survey among employees at the Groningen, Leeuwarden and Zwolle bases produced 280 reports of aggression in May, including seven cases of physical violence. More than 90 per cent of participants said they had felt unsafe. The results come from a trade union survey and are not a nationwide measurement.
VVMC says that sufficient security staff, clear protocols, proper training and appropriate safety equipment are needed. On its website, the union has a separate reporting point for aggression and railway safety. It wants to make incidents more visible and put pressure on transport operators and public authorities.
The debate is therefore not only about the response after an incident, but also about how public transport is organised. FNV wants boa’s to be able to establish identities more quickly and to have more options in emergencies until the police arrive. At the same time, the question is how much additional staff, supervision and police deployment are needed to prevent escalation.
The parliamentary questions have not yet been answered. Until those answers are available, it is unclear what measures the cabinet is considering and whether it can confirm VVMC’s and NS’s figures. Nor can the available public sources show what proportion of the reports took place at stations, on trains or on specific routes.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- VVMC sent a strongly worded letter on 25 September about aggression against railway staff.
- D66 submitted written questions to the State Secretary for Infrastructure and Water Management on 29 September.
- The parliamentary questions cite 5,088 reports at NS during the first three quarters of 2026.
- Trade unions do not disagree about the existence of safety problems, but they do differ over the desired mix of staff, powers, supervision and criminal-law enforcement.
Left
Arguments The safety of railway staff is a public responsibility. Invest structurally in more staff, supervision and support, and prevent conductors from being given additional powers to use force as a substitute for police capacity.
Values Solidarity, safe working conditions and strong public transport.
Consequences More public spending and staff may be needed, but could limit escalation and disruption in the longer term.
Centre
Arguments Use reliable, disaggregated figures to choose targeted measures. Combine additional supervision and better cooperation with limited, clearly defined powers for boa’s, training and independent evaluation.
Values Proportionality, feasibility, the rule of law and continuity of transport.
Consequences A combination of measures may build support, but requires time, good record-keeping and clear responsibilities between NS, the police and the government.
Right
Arguments Anyone who threatens or attacks railway staff must be dealt with swiftly and visibly. Ensure sufficient police and security, give enforcement officers clear powers, and emphasise deterrence and consistent punishment.
Values Authority, order, responsibility and the protection of workers and passengers.
Consequences A tougher approach can clarify the standard, but entails costs and the risk that more powers without sufficient training will create new tensions.
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 core claims can be found in official parliamentary questions, trade union publications and an independent regional news source. The limited independent confirmation of the latest nationwide figures is explicitly noted in the text and editor’s note.
- confirmed Dion Huidekooper submitted parliamentary questions on 29 September 2026 about violence against railway staff. — Mentioned in the official dossier of the Lower House (Tweede Kamer). source
- confirmed The parliamentary questions cite 5,088 reports at NS during the first three quarters of 2026. — The Lower House publishes this as a figure from VVMC’s strongly worded letter. source
- confirmed The 5,088 reports comprise 1,561 threats, 1,368 cases of physical violence and 105 threats involving a weapon. — This breakdown appears in the published parliamentary questions. source
- confirmed According to FNV, the number of serious NS incidents rose from 1,043 in 2023 to 1,095 in 2024 and 1,132 in 2025. — The series appears on FNV’s website and is attributed to trade union records. source
- confirmed A regional VVMC survey reported 280 cases of aggression, seven cases of physical violence and feelings of unsafety among more than 90 per cent of respondents. — OOG Groningen describes the results and the locations surveyed. source
- confirmed VVMC calls for sufficient security staff, protocols, training and safety equipment. — These priorities appear on VVMC’s public reporting point. source
- confirmed FNV wants more powers for boa’s and a tougher approach to violence against public transport staff. — The proposals appear in FNV’s statement of 9 March 2026. source
- confirmed The parliamentary questions had not yet been answered at the time of publication. — The official parliamentary document contains the questions but no answers. source
Editor's note
It is certain that D66 submitted parliamentary questions on 29 September and that they cite figures from VVMC’s strongly worded letter. The 5,088 reports were not independently confirmed by NS in the sources consulted; the regional figures come from a trade union survey.Sources
- De toenemende agressie en het geweld tegen spoorwegpersoneel — Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal
- Geweld tegen ov-personeel neemt toe, politiek moet nú ingrijpen — FNV
- Spoorpersoneel eist maatregelen op Hoofdstation na ernstige incidenten — OOG Groningen
- Meldingen over agressie en spoorwegveiligheid — VVMC
More on this in Dutch media
- Het Parool — „spoor spoorwegpersoneel”
- Trouw — „spoor spoorwegpersoneel”
- NRC — „spoor spoorwegpersoneel”