Van Woord tot Akkoord

Abstract

This PhD-thesis analyses the relationship between the parties’ choices in the CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis’ assessments of the election manifestos and coalition agreements over the period 1986-2017, and tries to explain this relationship. First, the theoretical framework is set out, in which agenda-setting, political economy and civil service influence have prominent positions, followed by a description of the political rationality and the civil service rationality. Then, multiple reflections are made on the history of the assessments and their (dis)advantages for both the Dutch politicians and the civil service. Second, the empirical analysis of the parties’ choices with regard to government expenditures, tax burdens, purchasing power and macroeconomic outcomes in election manifestos and coalition agreements is carried out. It appears that for the majority of parties’ choices, negotiators in the formation decide in line with their manifestos. But there are also clear deviations. In general; government expenditures turn out higher, except the expenditures on education. Tax burdens end up higher, but foremost for households while companies receive tax reliefs. The purchasing power of high incomes and middle incomes falls behind, in contrast to the purchasing power of social security beneficiaries and low incomes which end up better.