Ontwrichting van de Wereldeconomie? | NvdW #2400

Summary

The discussion covered housing and migration, global economic risks, Middle East tensions, the war in Ukraine, and the state of public and academic debate.

Housing, migration, and social cohesion

The panel discussed a report by the Economic Institute for Construction. According to figures cited in the programme, about 435,000 homes were built between 2015 and 2024, while migration accounted for a substantial share of additional housing demand. The speakers also cited international students, labour migrants, and asylum-related migration as contributors to pressure on housing. They stressed that the effect is not limited to availability: in their view, added demand also raises prices and leaves younger and lower-income residents worse off.

The speakers questioned how social-housing figures are presented. They contrasted a reported figure of around 7% for status holders across all social-housing allocations with a higher share—about 30%, they said—of homes newly available to tenants. They argued that the way figures are calculated can shape public perceptions, while acknowledging that a report’s statistics do not by themselves settle policy choices.

They also noted that smaller households and demographic change increase the number of homes needed, and discussed the possibility that ageing and deaths among baby boomers could eventually release housing.

The panel criticised what it sees as a policy that gives insufficient weight to the consequences of population growth for housing, schools, healthcare, and other services. They argued for prioritising people already living in the Netherlands and for a migration policy that takes capacity and integration seriously. They also contended that rapid demographic change can weaken shared language and social cohesion. These were presented as the speakers’ political and cultural judgments, not as findings established by the housing report.

The speakers said international responsibility matters too, but should be considered alongside domestic needs and the effects of Western interventions abroad.

IMF outlook and financial-system risks

Kees de Kort summarised the IMF’s economic outlook as relatively resilient so far: energy supplies have adjusted, some producers benefit from higher prices, and heavy investment in AI and data centres may support growth. The panel nevertheless considered the IMF’s expectation of a modest improvement in 2027 optimistic, given rising inflation and interest rates, government deficits, and uncertainty over the conflict involving Iran.

The IMF’s financial-stability warnings prompted greater concern. The speakers cited cyber risks, the scale of AI investment and the possibility of a market bubble, and the exposure created by years of low interest rates, borrowing, and investment in illiquid assets. If higher rates lead investors to withdraw funds, forced selling could worsen market stress and spill into the wider economy. They also pointed to the difficulty governments may face refinancing debt at higher rates.

Ad Verbrugge framed this more broadly as a system that can preserve itself for a long time through new fixes, but may become vulnerable to a sharp reversal.

Middle East and energy

The speakers observed that energy markets had so far absorbed disruptions better than they expected, partly because countries can draw on reserves, increase production, or source supplies elsewhere. But they warned that a wider conflict could threaten oil and other vital supplies, including gas, fertiliser, and food.

They offered different emphases on the region’s trajectory. Kees de Kort viewed attacks and pressure involving the Houthis and other actors partly as leverage intended to bring Iran and neighbouring states to negotiations over energy and regional arrangements. Ad Verbrugge stressed the weakening of US influence, the colonial origins of some borders, and the fragile legitimacy of governments in the region. He argued that these factors could fuel instability, including within Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, and potentially cause a severe global economic shock.

Both saw the situation as dangerous, even though they differed on whether negotiation or wider disorder was the more likely outcome.

Russia, Ukraine, and Europe

The programme showed a clip of AfD leader Alice Weidel calling for Germany to resume oil and gas supplies from Russia. The speakers presented her remarks as part of a broader argument against sanctions and continued support for Ukraine, and connected them to Germany’s economic difficulties. They described a proposed diesel arrangement involving Russia as limited in practical scale but politically significant.

The panel portrayed US policy as an effort to distance itself from the conflict while seeking a deal, while Europe continues to support Ukraine. They warned that attacks on energy infrastructure could leave Ukrainians without power during winter and lead to more people seeking refuge in Europe.

Kees de Kort considered Ukraine’s military position bleak and expected the battlefield to shape the outcome. The speakers also debated the risks of a broader confrontation and the need to consider the consequences of policy choices.

Media, academic freedom, and public debate

The discussion began from a reported warning by a representative of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences that academic freedom is under pressure. The panel argued that debate is constrained when dissenting views on Ukraine, climate, Gaza, or other issues are dismissed with labels such as “Putin sympathiser” rather than addressed on their merits. They criticised mainstream media for, in their view, acting less as watchdogs and more as amplifiers of official narratives.

They also questioned the use of scientific expertise to settle political and moral questions. In their view, decisions about issues such as public health and climate policy involve values and should remain open to democratic debate, rather than being presented as matters on which experts alone can dictate the answer. They called for more room to examine history, competing arguments, and practical consequences.

Rogier van Bemmel added that dissent can itself become polarised, and argued for stepping back from fixed camps and making space for a more reflective exchange.

Presenters and contributors

• Rogier van Bemmel — presenter
• Ad Verbrugge — guest
• Kees de Kort — guest