The cabinet supports the European Commission's efforts to simplify EU digital legislation through so-called omnibus packages, but does not want to agree without reservations. The Netherlands wants to retain the freedom to negotiate on its own terms on aspects that give cause for concern. The cabinet emphatically rejects any further postponement of the AI Act —via a so-called stop-the-clock. According to The Hague, this would actually lead to more uncertainty for businesses.
The response follows the Vermeer motion (BBB), which calls for full support for the digital omnibus line and advocates for further expansion of stop-the-clock in the AI Act. The motion also calls for additional improvements to digital rules within the European Digital Fitness Check.
In the background are the recent, controversial Omnibus proposals from the European Commission. According to Brussels, these should lead to "administrative simplification," but civil society organizations, lawyers, and privacy experts warn that in practice, the proposals could weaken essential safeguards such as the GDPR, the ePrivacy rules, and certain key provisions of the AI Act.
The leaked drafts—now confirmed in the official November publication—revealed, for example, that companies would be allowed to use sensitive personal data for AI training on the basis of a "legitimate interest," and that the definition of personal data would be narrowed. Cookie rules may also be incorporated into the GDPR, with the risk that access to devices will be made easier without prior consent. Organizations such as EDRi, noyb, and the NJCM warn that this would mean a structural weakening of privacy, transparency, and oversight, and that Big Tech in particular would benefit from this.
The government is particularly critical of the AI Act. According to the Netherlands, the proposed changes in the Omnibus packages will lead to unnecessary and unclear delays in implementation, while supervision of high-risk algorithms must be arranged in a timely manner. The Omnibus proposals for AI postpone certain obligations for high-risk systems and, under certain conditions, allow suppliers to escape core obligations.
The government is therefore not in favor of further extending the stop-the-clock period: further delays would leave businesses in uncertainty, would not contribute to reducing the regulatory burden, and would increase the risk that citizens would be less well protected against damage caused by AI systems.
The cabinet can give the Vermeer motion a parliamentary opinion, provided that it is interpreted in such a way that the Netherlands cooperates constructively but can continue to take an independent position in the negotiations. In doing so, there must be room to continue to express concerns, including objections to further postponement of the AI Act and to parts of the Omnibus that, in the Netherlands' view, go beyond mere technical simplification.
The Netherlands emphasizes that simplification must not lead to new burdens, weakened privacy protection, or an erosion of national security powers. However, if the motion would mean that the Netherlands must express its full support without criticism or negotiation, the cabinet advises against the motion.
