Stricter border controls and a limit of 15,000 asylum seekers per year are among the policies in the BBB’s draft election manifesto as the party looks to make immigration its main issue.

Two years ago the farmers’ party won seven seats in parliament, increasing its number of MPs by six but taking just a quarter of its vote share from the provincial elections earlier that year.

It gained an eighth seat two weeks ago when Agnes Joseph defected from the centre-right Nieuw Sociaal Contract (NSC), which like the BBB was part of the recent four-party coalition.

The BBB’s success was driven by anger in rural communities about plans to reduce the number of cattle farmers in the Netherlands through a buyout programme, including compulsory purchases if necessary, to deal with the excessive levels of nitrogen compound emissions.

But the party, led by Caroline van der Plas, was eclipsed at the general election as immigration became the dominant issue, fuelling support for Geert Wilders’ far-right PVV, which became the largest party with 37 seats.

Border controls

The BBB’s manifesto in 2023 included just two pages on immigration, but the new draft programme has six paragraphs of detailed policies.

It includes capping new asylum admissions at 15,000 a year – a measure carried over from 2023 – unless a new conflict breaks out on European soil.

The BBB also wants to enforce the border controls that the outgoing cabinet introduced last November, but which were criticised as ineffective by the audit office, more rigorously.

The party also wants to curb the power of the Council of State (Raad van State), which functions as both the cabinet’s legal adviser and the highest administrative court in the land, arguing that it is “not working adequately as a legal safeguard”.

A judgment by the RvS that the Netherlands was bound by European law to reduce its nitrogen compound emissions triggered the farmers’ protests and led to the formation of the BBB in 2019.

The BBB says the nominations procedure to the council should be overhauled to “reduce the political character of this organ”.

Construction permits

The 2019 judgment has restricted provincial governments’ ability to issue conservation permits for construction projects at a time when the Netherlands is facing a shortage of more than 300,000 houses and needs to renovate much of its critical infrastructure.

Last December the RvS ruled that provinces could not offset projects that exceeded the nitrogen limits against projects with relatively low emission levels when issuing nature permits, in a fresh blow to the farming and construction sectors.

Two years ago the BBB called for a general amnesty for farmers and constructors whose projects fell foul of the Council of State judgment, because it struck out the old system for issuing nature permits.

The previous method allowed the future benefits of eco-friendly projects to offset nitrogen compound emissions during construction, but the judgment said emissions levels had to be kept within limits at all times.

National and provincial governments have said they will not stop companies operating while a new regime is put in place, but activist group Mobilisation for the Environment has threatened to go to court if the issue is not resolved.

Food standards

In its new manifesto the BBB no longer calls for an amnesty, but says applications by former permit holders should be given priority when the new permit system comes into force.

The food standards regulator NVWA is another target for the BBB, which says the agency should focus on its core tasks and hand over parts of its supervisory role to the private sector.

Rules on animal welfare should only be introduced if they are “politically unavoidable”, as long as they do not restrict farmers’ incomes or force them to reduce the size of their herds.

The BBB is also critical of the commitment by Nato countries to raise spending to 3.5% of GDP by 2035, plus another 1.5% to improve critical infrastructure. The party says military spending should never be an “aim in itself“ and opposes making cuts to social security or raising the pension age to fund the armed forces.