All in all, the coalition parties in the Dutch government - Christian Democrats, Labour and the orthodox christian ChristenUnie - are pretty happy with the crisis plan they presented to parliament this week.

Each party was able to score some important points, and they all feel they were able to do more than just list a series of easy measures.

The only trouble is that the strenuous negotiations which led to the agreement make it very hard to sell the plan as anything other than a safe compromise between parties who have been taking ideological potshots at each other for the past three weeks at the expense of any really courageous measures.

Red lines

This is partly true. There are no far-reaching structural reforms in the crisis plan because each party had its own red line. Capping the mortgage write-off was a no-no for the Christian Democrats, cutting into health care was a bridge too far for Labour, and ChristenUnie was ready to defend the so-called "aanrechtsubsidie" (a subsidy for stay-at-home spouses) to the death. They only agreed on raising the state pension age because all three parties were equally uncomfortable with it.

The coalition partners proudly point out that they were able to find a nice balance between short-term measures, medium term cuts and long-term reforms. And that this would have been unimaginable, politically speaking, only six months ago.

The stimulus package is intelligent and future-oriented, they say. An effort has been made to direct the money being pumped into the economy towards sustainable and innovative companies and activities, and towards (re)training the workforce. This way, once the recession is over, the Netherlands will have a new, cleaner and smarter economy. Investing in roads and waterways may not make the Netherlands smarter or more sustainable, but these investments would have to be made anyway - so why not do it now that the economy is on its knees?

Criticism that it is all too little too late is countered by pointing to the stimulating effect of not making more budget cuts to compensate for diminished revenue. This, prime minister Balkenende said on Wednesday, counts for another 50 billion euros - a debatable figure. (Additional unemployment benefits alone, which will not be compensated by making cuts elsewhere, count for 10 billion euros.)

Geert Wilders walks out

As for too late: when was the last time an agreement this important was reached in just three weeks, the cabinet says.

The opposition has a different take on things. They are underwhelmed by the crisis plan, saying it lacks substance and ambition, and they feel insulted by the way it was cooked up between the three coalition parties and the social partners, without a role for parliament.

Things didn't improve when the Christian Democrat speaker started Thursday's debate by saying that chances parliament would be able to make any changes to the cabinet's crisis plan are "extremely limited". Geert Wilders, of the populist Freedom Party, reacted by walking out, saying he refused to be part of what he called "a North Korean parliament".

The remaining opposition parties mainly concentrated on the role of the largest union, FNV. They pointed out that the main structural measure in the crisis plan, raising the state pension age, was not a measure at all since the unions have been given until October to come up with alternatives that would result in the same kinds of savings, and the details have yet to be worked out.

Raising the pension age

The state pension age in the Netherlands (AOW, the age at which a person is entitled to a guaranteed state pension) has been 65 since it was introduced in 1956. The cabinet now wants to raise it to 67. But exactly how the government intends to do this is unclear.

In any case, new legislation will be needed to raise the pension age and this will take time - until 2011 at the earliest but possibly not before 2012 or even 2016, as an advisory board has suggested. It is also likely to happen in stages rather than all at once. For instance, one or two months might be added every year. At this rate it would take 12 or 24 years before the 67-years age limit is reached. One proposal is to start with six months in order for the measure to have a more immediate effect on the budget.

Several other considerations further complicate the picture. There are those who want people who have worked for forty years without interruption to be exempt; others want people in 'hard labour' jobs to be exempt. (What exactly constitutes 'hard labour' is still up for discussion.) Raising the pension age will also have an effect on benefits - such as disability benefits - which can be higher than the AOW and will continue for longer if the pensionable age is raised.

In the cabinet's plan, raising the state pension age to 67 is supposed to bring in 4.2 billion euros in the long term.