The future of Geert Wilders’s “harshest asylum policy ever” is in the balance after MPs voted to retain the law allowing the government to force local councils to accommodate a minimum number of refugees.

Wilders had said his PVV party would vote against its own asylum bill unless the so-called “spreading law”, designed to relieve overcrowding at the asylum reception centres in Ter Apel and Budel, was abolished immediately.

On Tuesday he said his party would support part of the plan after MPs unexpectedly voted for another of the PVV’s amendments to criminalise overstayers. Parliament will decide on Thursday whether to pass the bill.

Asylum seekers who stay in the Netherlands after their applications are turned down could be jailed for up to six months, as could any individuals or organisations who help them avoid the authorities.

But the vote promoted the centre-right Christian Democrats (CDA) to drop its support for the amended bill. “It means people who help others will be criminalised,” party leader Henri Bontenbal said. “That is a road we are absolutely not prepared to go down.”

The measure was passed thanks to a mix-up by MPs from opposition party GroenLinks-PvdA who were absent from the chamber during the vote because they were attending Keti Koti, the annual commemoration of the abolition of slavery, in Amsterdam.

They were supposed to arrange with individual MPs who supported the measure to abstain from voting under the so-called “pairing” convention. But two GroenLinks-PvdA MPs paired off with two colleagues from NSC, which supports the asylum bill in general but is against criminalising illegal overstayers.

Keti Koti

That cost the opposition two votes, while another MP from the animal rights party PvdD was unable to get back to the chamber from Keti Koti in time to vote because she relied on public transport.

Wilders heckled his opponents on Twitter for missing the vote to take part in the “weird slavery business” in Amsterdam, but other aspects of his party’s plans were defeated.

Wilders has made abolishing the “spreading law” a precondition of his party’s support for the two asylum bills, arguing that the government should be closing refugee centres rather than forcing councils to open more.

The laws were drafted by the PVV’s asylum minister, Marjolein Faber, before Wilders pulled out of the coalition last month because the other three parties refused to sign up to a 10-point plan of even stricter rules.

PVV MPs said last week they would not vote for a “watered-down” version of Faber’s bill. But the plan is essentially the same as the original version proposed by the minister despite strong criticism from the Council of State, the government’s legal adviser, and organisations that will be responsible for implementing it, such as the immigration service IND.

Temporary residency

One of the laws would abolish permanent residency status for refugees, requiring them to reapply for permission to stay every three years.

It would also stop settled refugees from being joined by their partners and children until they have lived in the country for two years and have a home and an income. Adult children would be excluded from the ruling altogether.

The other bill would introduce a “two-tier” asylum system, separating refugees who fled their home countries because they faced persecution for their ethnicity, sexual orientation or religion, and those fleeing unstable situations such as a war or natural disaster.

More bureaucracy

The Council of State said there was no evidence that the measures would have the desired effect of bringing down refugee numbers, while the IND and the refugee accommodation service COA said it would add to their workload.

An earlier version of the two-tier system was abolished in 2000 because large numbers of asylum seekers went to court to challenge their status.

Wilders indicated on Tuesday the PVV was prepared to support the first law now that MPs had agreed to make overstaying a criminal offence, calling it a “historic” decision.

The CDA also says it could block the other law on the two-tier system because it wants to delay the introduction until next June to give the immigration service more time to prepare.

The IND has asked for the delay so it can harmonise the new rules with new European rules that come into force at the same time, but an amendment tabled by the CDA to that effect was defeated on Tuesday.