Get on My Level: An Intractable Policy Controversy Through a Multi-Layered Lens

This thesis investigates the differences in multi-level or national-local governance relation between two local governments in the Netherlands regarding the reception of migrants with an irregular status. The case of the Bed-Bath-Bread crisis marks an intractable policy controversy between the national and local governments due to the contested nature of the issue, and diverging interests and priorities of both government levels. The two case studies, Amsterdam and Rotterdam, often face the consequences of the policy created on the national level. The Bed-Bath-Bread facilities were created to combat ‘humanitarian issues’ that local governments were faced with. However, these same Bed-Bath-Bread facilities could counter the efficiency of the rather restrictive national policy set up to reduce irregular or illegal migration. Therefore, this study investigates how two cities, similar in size, economic climate and percentage of foreign born population, have responded to national policy changes regarding these reception facilities since the MatchingLaw in 1998. The study has found that the two largest municipalities in the Netherlands diverged in framing and multilevel governance configuration due to the political composition of the municipalities and the local contextual factors which shaped the national-local government relations. There were for example more instances of significant economic frames found in Rotterdam, mostly originating from policy documents which were influenced by Livable Rotterdam – framing the reception facilities of irregular migrants as a ‘costly issue’. Whereas Amsterdam showed more indicators of humanitarian frames, often influenced by policy documents from GroenLinks which objected against national policy in light of the safety, health and vulnerability of the migrants with irregular status. Both municipalities were often in friction with national policy, due to local events which triggered a decoupled period with the national government. Yet, considering the opposing differences in political climate between both cities, there were a surprising number of similarities between municipalities, both in frames and tumulus relations with the national government regarding the issue. There is a “red-line” which can be traced through both the framing and national-local governance configurations of both cities. This red-line entails that both municipalities at the start of the MatchlingLaw showed signs of governance decoupling and resistance for this national restrictive turn in policy. However, thereafter coinciding with the ‘assimilationist turn’ local policy became more restrictive as well. This means that the implemented or framed ‘restrictive’ national policies converged more with local policies than hypothesized, especially considering the expected ‘local turn’ of migration policies and the contested nature of the policy issue at hand.