VVD loses seats in new poll
The party loses seats as voters remain divided over cooperation and social security.
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
.jpg){kind=link}
The VVD is losing seats in a new Ipsos I&O poll. Voters relatively often hold the party responsible for the failure to reach budget agreements, while according to the reporting provided, the party leadership is trying to project calm.
Ipsos I&O reports that the VVD and D66 are losing seats in the October poll after an unconvincing political month. The poll measures voters’ preferences at the time of the survey and does not predict an election result.
According to Ipsos I&O, the party is also assigned the greatest responsibility for the absence of a majority for all the cabinet’s budget plans. 41 per cent of respondents name the VVD in this context. That is respondents’ judgement, not an established finding of governmental culpability.
At the same time, the poll shows that voters are not responding uniformly to the political direction. According to Ipsos I&O, the two proposed cuts to social security, affecting unemployment benefit (WW) and disability benefit (WIA), have been rejected by a majority. 53 per cent want to keep the level of WW unchanged, while 52 per cent say the same about WIA.
This creates a dual problem for the VVD. The party wants to present itself as responsible in government and financially responsible, but could lose voters to parties promising greater protection if it cuts social security. At the same time, a shift towards higher spending could damage its credibility among financially conservative voters.
According to the reporting, the party leadership has not announced a change of leader. The current development is primarily the combination of a new negative poll and the internal question of how the party should sharpen its economic and social profile.
Polls are snapshots. They do not say which coalition will be possible after an election and can change as a result of campaigning, events and party leaders. They do, however, indicate which issues voters currently associate with parties.
For the VVD, the attribution of responsibility is particularly relevant. If voters see the party both as a necessary party of government and as an obstacle to budget agreements, the leadership must explain which choices it is making and which compromises it considers acceptable. The poll does not answer that political question.
Also show where in Europe and in the world
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- Ipsos I&O reports seat losses for the VVD and D66.
- 41 per cent name the VVD as responsible for the failure to secure a majority for all the budget plans.
- A majority of respondents do not want WW and WIA benefits to be reduced.
- The poll is a snapshot and not an election result.
Left
Arguments The VVD should not treat social security as a budget item on which cuts are made above all; financial security and protection against loss of income should come first.
Values Solidarity, income security and protection of workers.
Consequences Higher spending could protect purchasing power, but would require higher revenues or savings elsewhere.
Centre
Arguments The party should combine social protection with sustainable public finances and seek reforms that work without suddenly affecting vulnerable groups.
Values Continuity in government, affordability and feasibility.
Consequences A compromise could attract broad support, but could also be seen as insufficiently clear by both supporters and opponents.
Right
Arguments The VVD must remain financially credible and not abandon every unpopular choice because of polls; social security should be structured to be affordable and encourage people into work.
Values Personal responsibility, budgetary discipline and economic incentives.
Consequences Stricter conditions could increase labour-force participation, but could also increase insecurity and loss of income.
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 stated percentages and the political interpretation of the poll can be checked against the Ipsos I&O publication. The text distinguishes measured results from interpretations and does not present a poll as an election result.
- confirmed The VVD and D66 lose seats in the October poll. — This is stated in the title and results of Ipsos I&O. source
- confirmed 41 per cent name the VVD as responsible for the failure to secure a majority for the budget plans. — Ipsos I&O reports this percentage. source
- confirmed 53 per cent want to keep WW unchanged and 52 per cent want to keep WIA unchanged. — These percentages appear in the Ipsos I&O publication. source
Editor's note
The poll figures come from Ipsos I&O. The description of the party leadership is limited to what is supported by public reporting; internal considerations cannot be established independently.Sources
- Ipsos I&O-zetelpeiling: VVD en D66 leveren in na weinig overtuigende maand — Ipsos I&O Publiek
- VVD-bijeenkomst over de koers van de partij — NPO Radio 1
More on this in Dutch media
- AD — „vvd ipsos i&o”
- de Volkskrant — „vvd ipsos i&o”
- RTL Nieuws — „vvd ipsos i&o”