After the elections, a majority coalition will have to be formed to govern the country. The cabinet formation can begin. In the Netherlands, where, mainly due to our electoral system, parliament consists of factions, none of which have a majority, it is much more difficult to appoint ministers who can be considered to have the confidence of the majority of the parliament.
Realization of the election manifesto
Elections would not make much sense if the result of these elections were limited to a changed composition of the parliament. The result would then be equivalent to a massive opinion poll in which all Dutch people entitled to vote could participate.
Elections are about more: how the country should be governed and in what direction policy should develop. The election manifestos of the political parties have strong views on these matters. After the voters have given their opinion by voting for a particular party and therefore also by issuing a programme, it is a matter of how and to what extent these different visions should be realized.
This realization is only possible if the parliament has a strong influence on the policy that the government pursues and can determine in broad terms which policy will and which policy will not be pursued. If the elections result in an absolute majority for one party and if this party has obtained more than half of the seats in the parliament, this condition can be met without much difficulty by forming a cabinet from ministers belonging to this majority party. This team of ministers (cabinet) then simply relies on the majority of parliament. The ministers belong to this party and will therefore be inclined to
adhere to this party’s program as far as possible . If they infringe on the program or if they implement a policy that is not compatible with the program and insights of the majority party, the majority always has the option to withdraw confidence from the ministers and send them home.
To trust
This relationship between parliament and the cabinet is known as the parliamentary system and in most Western European countries it arose from the principle of ministerial responsibility.
This ministerial responsibility means that ministers have the obligation to account to the parliament for implemented and proposed policies. If the majority of the parliament considers accountability to be insufficient and therefore cannot agree with the policy, there is a conflict situation between this majority and the minister(s) involved. This conflict situation can only be resolved by the resignation of these minister(s) or by the government holding new elections in the hope that a newly elected parliament will find the policy acceptable.
This second option has virtually fallen into disuse, leaving only resignation. Naturally, that resignation must be followed by the appointment of a minister whose policy can be expected to have the approval of the majority.
Although termination of trust and subsequent resignation is not part of our written constitutional law, this rule is still generally followed. We therefore include it as part of (unwritten) constitutional customary law.
The principle of ministerial responsibility thus evolves into the rule of confidence: in order to stay in office, ministers need the confidence of the majority of the parliament. This rule of confidence in turn means that, before the appointment of ministers, it is determined whether it can be assumed that the ministers to be appointed can count on that trust.
English system
In countries where a parliamentary majority is formed by members of one party, this is not a problem. Ministers who themselves belong to this majority party will generally have confidence. In England, where elections almost always result in a parliamentary majority of one party (a homogeneous majority), looking for new ministers, or in other words: forming a cabinet, is a simple matter.
The minority party (the opposition party) can even have the ministers at hand before the elections and thus form a shadow cabinet. If the opposition wins a majority in the elections, the head of state will usually automatically appoint the ministers of this shadow cabinet as real ministers. The ministers of the previous cabinet, belonging to the party that lost the majority, resign and in turn form a shadow cabinet. If he maintains a majority in the ruling party in the elections, replacement will not even be necessary.
Of course, this does not mean that the members of the real cabinet and the shadow cabinet will remain in place from amen to eternity. From time to time there is also a replacement, but these changes are more the result of the desire to have the best man in the best place than of a loss of parliamentary confidence.
Cabinet formation
The ballot box does not produce a homogeneous majority, so it must be formed through negotiations between the factions. This negotiation process is the most important part of what is called cabinet formation.
It has become customary in the Netherlands that the leadership of the cabinet formation rests with the Queen. Under the Constitution, the head of state must appoint and swear in the new ministers; the head of state is therefore the
appropriate figure to lead the cabinet formation. However, especially for a crowned head of state, it is of the utmost importance to observe political neutrality.
Outline of cabinet formation
That is why it has become customary for the Queen
to have the cabinet formation carried out by someone else: the cabinet formateur. Over the last fifteen years, a more or less fixed procedure for cabinet formation has developed, the main points of which are as follows:
Immediately after the elections, the Queen is advised by the vice-chairman of the Council of State, by the chairmen of the the Senate and the House of Representatives and by the chairmen of all factions in the House of Representatives;
Based on this advice, the Queen gives a formation assignment to a cabinet formateur. The queen usually requests this formateur to form a cabinet that can count on fruitful cooperation with the parliament.
Other descriptions are also common: to form a cabinet that enjoys the confidence, or can be expected to gain the confidence of, the people’s representation. The differences in the assignments are subtle and usually express a certain expectation regarding the possibility of forming a cabinet. The more vague the assignment, the more options the formateur has, but usually the chance of forming a sustainable cabinet is smaller;
The formateur opens discussions with the faction leaders of those parties in the House of Representatives, on which, in his opinion, a new cabinet can best rely, given the political relations and the outcome of the elections;
The discussions ultimately resulted in a draft government program and a team of candidate ministers .