Dutch MPs demand clearer rules, fair share in EU funding plan for Overseas Territories

THE HAGUE--Members of the Dutch House of Representatives’ Standing Committee for Kingdom Relations have submitted written questions to the State Secretary for the Interior and Kingdom Relations about the European Commission’s proposal to revise the EU Overseas Countries and Territories (OCT) Decision for the 2028 to 2034 budget period. The questions follow a cabinet position note sent to Parliament and focus on transparency in funding access, the proposed loan facility, and practical support so Caribbean OCT administrations can participate effectively.

The Government of the Netherlands has reviewed the European Commission’s proposal for a revised Overseas Countries and Territories decision within the EU Multiannual Financial Framework for 2028 to 2034. The proposal nearly doubles the OCT envelope to 999 million euros, with 530 million euros for Greenland and 425 million euros for the French and Dutch OCTs combined.

The European Commission’s proposal, registered September 3, 2025, is part of the next EU Multiannual Financial Framework and would expand overall OCT support, including a larger allocation for Greenland and a combined envelope for French and Dutch OCTs. The Netherlands earlier welcomed the proposal’s strategic framing and stated aim to simplify procedures, while signaling it will seek clearer access rules, a transparent allocation method, and workable reporting requirements aligned with the execution capacity of the islands.

Within the committee’s written consultation, multiple political groups raise concerns that complex EU rules and limited administrative capacity have historically constrained the use of available instruments, and they ask how the government will protect Dutch Caribbean interests in Council negotiations and in eventual implementation.

D66 asks how reducing the frequency of the EU–OCT forum from annual to biennial aligns with fast-moving political and security developments in the Caribbean, and what mechanisms would allow timely course correction when needed. D66 also asks what preparations the islands and the Netherlands are making for the new OCT budget cycle, whether joint projects across islands are possible, and how the government will frame the geopolitical importance of Caribbean investment, including in light of regional instability.

VVD underscores the need for clear criteria, transparent decisions, and an active Dutch role in Council discussions so Dutch OCTs can access funding, and asks for comparisons between the proposal and the current OCT framework. VVD also questions how predictability can be maintained if fixed multiannual envelopes are reduced, how the Netherlands will avoid reserving national funds without certainty of EU co-financing, and whether smaller territories risk losing out to larger OCTs in competitive funding. VVD raises specific concerns about the proposed loan facility, including possible implications for Dutch financial frameworks and potential exposure for the Dutch state.

GroenLinks–PvdA asks whether the proposal could shift further due to heightened attention to Greenland and what that would mean for the Caribbean parts of the Kingdom. The faction requests clarity on how the combined envelope for French and Dutch OCTs would be divided, when allocation rules will be known, and whether the amount is sufficient for the tasks ahead. GroenLinks–PvdA also asks for a detailed analysis of the differences between French territories’ EU status and the position of Dutch OCTs, including the practical pros and cons for the Caribbean parts of the Kingdom, and how the three autonomous countries and the three Caribbean Netherlands public bodies are involved in negotiations.

CDA notes that the Commission positions OCTs as “strategic outposts” and asks what this means in concrete terms for security, resilience, and regional cooperation in the Caribbean, including how plans will avoid becoming policy ambitions without execution power. CDA also calls for enforceable simplifications that prevent funds from flowing mainly to better-resourced territories, and asks how the Netherlands will ensure EU funding is additional to, rather than a substitute for, national and Kingdom resources. The party further questions transparency and oversight in allocation, the risks of the loan facility for debt and financial supervision, and how the member state role will be strengthened in the design and oversight of multiannual programming.

BBB asks how the Netherlands will guarantee that the Dutch islands, including the Caribbean Netherlands public bodies, receive a fair and proportional share of the combined envelope relative to French territories. BBB also asks how “food security” funding would translate into practical support for local agriculture and fisheries, and what risks the Dutch state might face if OCT borrowers cannot meet repayment obligations under the proposed EU loan facility.

Process and next steps

Council adoption of the OCT Decision follows a special procedure under Article 203 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, requiring unanimity in the Council after consultation of the European Parliament.

The committee’s questions now await a formal government reply, which is expected to clarify negotiation priorities, safeguards around the loan facility, and the practical steps the Netherlands will take to help the Caribbean parts of the Kingdom, including St. Maarten, navigate application requirements and access EU instruments under the next long-term EU budget cycle.

‍