Verlenging naturalisatietermijnen

Reactie

Vraag1

I would like to respectfully oppose the proposed extension of the naturalization period from 5 to 10 years.

My family and I relocated to the Netherlands one year ago through the highly skilled migrant program. We made this decision because the Netherlands has historically stood for justice and fairness, as reflected in its leadership at the international court of justice, and because there are very few countries left that remain genuinely foreign-friendly.

I fully agree that there must be strong measures to control illegal immigration and manage asylum requests effectively. However, applying a blanket extension of naturalization to all residents—regardless of how they entered, contributed, or integrated—would be unfair and counterproductive. Families who came through legal and structured pathways, whose children are already adapting to the Dutch education system, and who contribute through taxes, innovation, and skilled work, should not face the same restrictions as irregular migration cases.

From an economic perspective, countries that impose a 10-year naturalization period often lose competitiveness in attracting and retaining international talent. Skilled workers compare policies when deciding where to relocate, and a longer path to citizenship reduces a country’s attractiveness. For example, countries like Canada and Australia offer relatively quicker naturalization and, as a result, gain significantly from inflows of skilled labor that drive innovation, entrepreneurship, and tax revenues. The Netherlands risks losing this competitive edge by making the path longer and less secure for families who wish to fully invest their future here.

With the ongoing housing crunch and integration challenges, extending naturalization will only create more uncertainty for families who already contribute positively to Dutch society. Instead of encouraging stability and long-term commitment, it risks discouraging skilled migrants from settling, at a time when the Dutch economy needs them most.

In conclusion, while immigration controls are necessary, a differentiated approach would be far more effective than a blanket extension. Skilled migrants and their families, who are already legally residing, contributing, and integrating, should not be subjected to unnecessary hurdles that could undermine both their future and the Netherlands’ global competitiveness.