A toppolitician who chooses for his family

by Ingrid Robeyns on March 12, 2010

Dutch politics was shaken up today, when “Wouter Bos”:http://www.pvda.nl/politici/politici/wouterbos, the political leader of the social-democrats, “PVDA”:http://nu.pvda.nl/, announced that he will leave politics in order to be able to spend more time on another major responsibility he has in life – his three children and his wife. His children are almost one, four, and six, and his decision to want to spend more time with them was the only reason he gave in his unexpected “farewell speech”:http://nu.pvda.nl/berichten/2010/03/Verklaring+Wouter+Bos.html. The Dutch cabinet was dissolved recently over a dispute between the Christian Democratic Party (“CDA”:http://www.cda.nl/) and the PVDA on whether or not to continue sending troops to Afghanistan, and elections are scheduled for early June.

I think this is a great loss for the social-democratic party, a great loss for Dutch politics and public life, but an amazing supporting signal for the kind of feminist movement which I endorse. A top male politicians says: “Enough. I don’t want to have children and a wife whom I never see.” And he uses the right word: “major responsibility”, not just something he fancies doing. His decision will serve to an increasing acceptance that both men and women are entitled to combine having a family with doing paid work – even if this implies that they need to quit a top position.

I’ve seen many short interviews today with other Dutch politicians and other public figures. And it’s interesting that most of them said they “understood” his decision, adding that he made enormous sacrifices to his family life in the last years. Of course, it is likely that other motives played a role too – but I don’t see any serious grounds for doubting his official reason as being the main reason for his decision. When about six years ago, he was ‘merely’ an MP (and not yet a Minister of Finance), he choose to use his legal right to parental leave and thus was home with his baby one day a week. I therefore think that the few public figures who have today said that his was just ‘an excuse’ and that he should give his ‘real reasons’ for quiting politics are wrong and should be deeply ashamed of themselves. If a woman were to give ‘time for family’ as the reason we would believe her; if a man, who earlier on in his political life took parental leave, gives the same reason, we should similarly believe him. Anything else would be wrong and sexist. I hope he and his kids will enjoy the time together.

{ 26 comments }

1

I-phobe 03.12.10 at 8:35 pm

Is this good news for Geert Wilders?

2

Matt 03.12.10 at 8:36 pm

When a politician in the US says he “wants to spend more time with his family” it almost always means there’s a scandal coming, often enough a sex scandal. I hope that won’t turn out to be the case here!

3

Ingrid Robeyns 03.12.10 at 8:38 pm

Matt, my husband indeed earlier today told me that this was how ‘wanting to spend more time with the family’ is understood in the US. But not here, luckily!

4

Harry 03.12.10 at 8:42 pm

The other thing is that when a politician in the US says he “wants to spend more time with his family” one’s second thought (after Matt’s) is “but do they want to spend more time with him? I wouldn’t”.

5

JoB 03.12.10 at 8:53 pm

Ingrid, I sympathize but then I’m evil spirited enough to think: why blame the kids? In a reasonably better world one would be able to be a top politician, ánd see one’s wife & children. Why is it unthinkable that Wouter just said: “Heh, I’m going to work less so I can see more of my family. If you don’t like it, vote me out of my job!”

6

engels 03.12.10 at 8:56 pm

I remember when Tony Benn retired from parliament he said it was because if wanted to spend more time on politics.

7

engels 03.12.10 at 8:59 pm

‘he wanted to spend more time on politics’

8

jacob 03.12.10 at 9:22 pm

Wasn’t there an issue several years ago when a Scandinavian prime minister–Sweden? Finnland?–had a child and either did or did not take paternal leave that was legally required to be offered him?

9

Jacob Christensen 03.12.10 at 9:56 pm

@7: Can’t remember how the legislation was in Sweden back then and also not if the child was born before or after he was appointed PM, but Carl Bildt had a child in 1991.

Otherwise, I must admit that I am not quite convinced by Bos’ motivation, and this goes for the “spend more time with the family generally). It is very unusual for a party leader to retire during an electoral campaign (even if the Dutch election is still some months away), so I would expect stories about the internal state of the PvdA appearing.

Oh, and I can only recall one Danish female politician at the national level retiring with the motivation that she wanted to concentrate on her personal life – and she did actually disappear out of public view completely to become a recluse. Otherwise, the argument is that they want to change careers. And those who have said so, have in fact gone on to either administrative or business careers.

10

hix 03.12.10 at 10:14 pm

I would neither believe a male or female politician claiming that reason. Gender stereotypes have nothing to do with it.

11

Ken Lovell 03.13.10 at 3:47 am

I agree with JoB that in a well-ordered world, it would be normal for parents in any walk of life to have enough time to meet family responsibilities.

That said, current arrangements are also a sad reflection on the Euro-American obsession with the nuclear family as the pre-eminent social unit. Adoption of an Asian extended family model of child-rearing would reduce this perceived conflict between career and family.

12

Ingrid Robeyns 03.13.10 at 7:47 am

If the PVDA would be doing extremely bad in the election forecasts, then it would be more likely to say that this is just an excuse. But it is clear that this is something he has decided not in just one night – he has been holding conversations with the candidate new-political leader, Job Cohen (the Meir of Amsterdam who ‘kept the city together’ after the murder on Theo van Gogh), and the exit of Bos was announced together with the candidacy of Cohen.

I think there are certain jobs that go together extremely difficult with having a care-intensive family (small children, disabled child, elderly in need, etc.). And Minister of Finance and vice-prime minister seems to be one in that category. So while in general I am all in favor of making the organisation of jobs compatible with care and family responsibilities, I think there is a category of jobs where this is not possible.

I would be all in favour of implementing the extended family model, but think that the high geographical mobility among highly educated workers, and the average age gap between parents and grandparents makes this difficult. In my particular case, two grandparents are no longer alive, and the two remaining grandparents are either too old or severely disabled. So they couldn’t provide any hands-on care. There’s only one sister-in-law who lives close by, and she cares for our children on a very regular basis. But the others live more than 150 km away.
Moreover, the extended family model would not solve what Bos and his children probably feel as their lack of time together. As Harry B. and Adam Swift have argued, that is a very important ‘relationship good’. Replacing parental care by extended-family care doesn’t contribute to meeting that need.

13

Zamfir 03.13.10 at 8:28 am

If the PVDA would be doing extremely bad in the election forecasts, then it would be more likely to say that this is just an excuse. But it is clear that this is something he has decided not in just one night
On the other hand, the PvdA has been doing bad in the polls for far more than a night by now. It seems very possible that he started talking to Cohen quite some time ago, on the premise that if Bos would return to popularity, he would lead the party, and Cohen otherwise.

That doesn’t mean he isn’t serious about his children, but if was widely popular now and likely to lead the PvdA to an election victory I doubt he would have quit. If only for the party’s sake.

14

Ingrid Robeyns 03.13.10 at 11:33 am

Zamfir, I think “for the party’s sake” is exactly what I think is the kernel of this case: the ‘new generation’ men who really care about their families are no longer willing to sacrifice everything “for the party’s sake”. And I think that is a very good evolution.

15

JoB 03.13.10 at 11:38 am

Ingrid,

Again, if there is a job that would go well with family life, it would be a job in politics. & who says that you do a better job in office when you work longer hours?

Also, the events are entirely compatible with the discussions with Cohen going thusly:

1. if the election result is not too bad, wait for a week or so then take the high road out
2. it the election result is too bad, go for the dramatic ‘sacrifice’-exit at election night

I’m all for being naïve and I think it is commendable that people exit something, but I’d be more impressed if he left his kids out, and rearranged society such as to not demand overwork (and nightly networking). Still, better to be able to let go than to be ‘the man’ that doesn’t give up, things deteriorate remarkably for the better ;-)

16

Martin Wisse 03.13.10 at 2:16 pm

His reasons for dropping out may be more htan just an excuse, but personally I think the current political climate has a lot to do with it as well. The next elections will have no clear winners nor clear coalitions, so politics at a national level will become an incredible hard slog. Government negotations will be hard, keeping any government together harder. I can well understand Bos not wanting to experience that, considering how much he aged already in the last two years.

Getting Cohen instead is a master stroke. He has no personal history with Balkenende and the Christian Democrats, unlike Bos, has a good reputation as a calm and dedicated mayor, liked and respected by most voters in Amsterdam and appeals to the anti-Wilders vote without having consciously profiled himself as the anti-Wilders candidate. He’s just the person the PvdA needs at this point.

17

bianca steele 03.13.10 at 2:33 pm

I have to say I first read the headline as meaning “making his family’s choices for them” (Every Family Needs a C.E.O. style).

18

Ernst 03.14.10 at 1:48 am

Zamfir, The PvdA was on a big upswing under Bos ever since they blew up the Government coalition. He was actually very much on the road for an electoral victory.

JoB, Do you or a a direct family member have any experience as an elected official? My own experience in politics and growing up as the son of a elected official is the direct opposite. The job requires an enormous amount of time for reading the relevant dossiers, meetings with key players, long sub committee meetings deciding actual policy, long meetings with the party reporting back the results. And then there is the duties you have to perform for the people that elected you, meeting with concerned citizens, writing companies on their behalf with questions. etc. etc.

In all the jobs I know of, for profit, non-profit, governmental, non-governmental, the one that asks the most time and the most knowledge to do well was that of politician. Even at the level of a simple city counselor the time spend is enormous, easily another 25 to 30 hours a week on top of your regular job if you do it well.

And that is simply not something that you can change about society. The time you need to become an expert in your field, the time needed to hold meetings in a coalition are simply non-negotiable. Now if you also add to that the extra burden of being the leader of your party a simple nine to five mentality will make you a very poor representative.

19

JoB 03.14.10 at 10:07 am

Ernst,

“And that is simply not something that you can change about society. ”

I beg to differ. I also beg to dissociate having time for the family with the pejorative of a ‘nine to five’ mentality. What my, or your, direct experience are is irrelevant – unless you are making ‘an argument from the elite’ where I have to accept that elected people are different; are somehow ‘called’ by a quasi-deity to their ‘calling’. If the latter, I have to say that I am offended by it.

I am not a socialist of the type that thinks you can ‘make’ society into this or that; but I am very much convinced of the fact that you can “make” politics into a profession that need not establish its credibility by competing with other sectors on time spent.

20

Phillip Hallam-Baker 03.14.10 at 11:51 pm

The first time I think the phrase was noted was when Sir Norman Fowler resigned from Thatcher’s administration. Although he claimed that the reason was ‘to spend more time with his family’ it was pretty clear that this was merely an alibi for serious political differences.

A few months later Fowler delivered the final blow when he advised her that if she attempted to stand in the second round of the leadership election she would be defeated and that she would not have his support. Her observation was that if she had lost Fowler she had lost the party.

And yes, he is a cousin.

21

Ingrid Robeyns 03.15.10 at 8:04 pm

As regular readers know from some of my previous posts, I am a very strong supporter of making work and family life compatible. So here is a question to follows from the comments and discussion (for which, all of you, thanks!):
are there any jobs or offices that are extremely difficult, perhaps even impossible, to combine with having significant, that is, really timeconsuming care duties, and that cannot be reformed without making the people who perform those jobs do them badly?

I would think that being a president or prime minister or a minister of one of the ‘heavier’ ministries, would fall into this category. And it is based on that assumption that I believe that Bos made a right decision if he really wanted to do some of the hands-on care for his children, and actually spend time with them.

22

JoB 03.15.10 at 9:15 pm

Ingrid, maybe so but I am worried on two-category thinking because where does the one start and where does the other stop? Also, how to argue with those who say that we should ‘do as the president’? Are we a lesser breed that settle for not having jobs in this category (or not willing to sacrifice as others sacrifice)? Finally, do we really need stressed people to make the hard choices? Does this also count for the presidents of a large corporation (how large?) and for chairpersons of faculties?

I’m sorry but I find this notion of yours deeply problematic. That being said I know it is the reality of the moment not to be seen as weak – & therefore applaud Bos’ audacity in this matter. It’s better to come out and say this then to project an image of strength; and be a role model of ‘strength’.

23

Ernst 03.15.10 at 9:54 pm

Job, why are you convinced of that? you just state it without any support. When I ask if you have direct experiences with the subject matter so I can figure out on what you base that opinion? And in response you say that personal experience is irrelevant?

If anybody should be insulted it’s me. It’s like you are telling a garbage man, that if he should lifted from his knees and enjoyed the sunshine more his job is just easy and peachy. And after the garbage man tells you that there is actually a bit more to it then that? you tell him that

Being a politician means two things; reading a lot and meeting people face to face to talk about what you read.

And there is the problem, meeting those people. Most of them can only meet you when they are free. They have jobs of their own. So those meeting are forced to be held at time that your kids come home from school, and the evenings with your spouse.

You could do a lot of reading at home, and you know what? Most politicians do. As did my father. The vast majority of my memories of my father while he was in politics and I was growing up are of him reading. But he still had 3 to 4 evenings a week that he simply couldn’t be home because he had to meet people face to face. And he never was anybody important. Just a small time council member. Just representing a couple of thousand people. Now if you represent a couple of million? Like Bos?

I also like your tone. Politics isn’t time consuming, it’s merely pretending to be that, in order to establish “credibility”. Not at all dismissive or arrogant. You said you believed that you can “make” legislative politics into something easier combined with family without giving any arguments how to or why. Ok. now is the time; Do it. Give us your best solutions, make all our lives better. Lives which we have been trowing away just so we can establish our credibilities against other jobs. Because obviously all those that actually work in the field have been just fools.

Enlighten us with your insights, HOW?

24

Martin Wisse 03.16.10 at 10:29 am

From personal experience, being involved in just helping running the Amsterdam branch of a political party was a tough job, easily consuming anywhere from 15-30 hours a week unpaid, on top of a proper job. For people with real responsibility and power it was even worse.

25

JoB 03.16.10 at 12:58 pm

Ernst, Well I am sorry if I offended you. I grant without reservation that the current system is such that politicians tend to survive only if they spend long hours on it. I do not grant that that is the only system, nor that it is the best system. You seem to tacitly believe that some form of direct democracy is the only real democracy that can be had. If that would be the case then the quality of democracy in Belgium would have deteriorated constantly from the 60s where there was an elaborate system of politicians ‘physically meeting’ their electorate. The reality is quite the contrary. Now, if you ask me to give counterexamples of politicians that have an impact, & a ‘normal’ life, I can’t, because the system is what it is. My remarks have to do with the systems and not with the people in it (which is why I hope I have not come to the point of insulting Bos on a personal level).

On the other hand, if you think my opinion is disqualified because I don’t have politicians in my family – or if my opinion, after study, of the work organization of garbage men is disallowed if I have never been a garbage man – I don’t buy that line of reasoning, no, not at all (if only because that would disqualify most of the electorate’s opinion on this).

The problem for me is as in my response to Ingrid.

26

ajay 03.17.10 at 4:22 pm

are there any jobs or offices that are extremely difficult, perhaps even impossible, to combine with having significant, that is, really timeconsuming care duties, and that cannot be reformed without making the people who perform those jobs do them badly?

Long-haul airline pilot or cabin crew.
Most jobs in the military, at least part of the time.
Oil rig worker.

Comments on this entry are closed.