The Netherlands, a country often associated with pragmatic governance, has quietly engineered what may be the most effective youth employment system in Europe. Known locally as the ‘No Dead Ends’ model, it is now being scrutinised by British ministers desperate to stem the rising tide of NEETs (Not in Education, Employment, or Training) in the UK.
At its core, the Dutch system is deceptively simple: every young person, regardless of background or educational attainment, is guaranteed a pathway to either a job, further training, or an apprenticeship. There are no gaps, no waiting lists, no bureaucratic black holes. The key mechanism is a mandatory early intervention protocol. When a young person loses their job or drops out of school, a caseworker is assigned within days. This is not a voluntary service it is a legal obligation. The state, the employer, and the educational institution all have defined responsibilities.
Data from the Dutch Central Bureau of Statistics shows the impact. Youth unemployment in the Netherlands has hovered around 7 per cent for the past five years, compared to nearly 12 per cent in the UK. More strikingly, the long-term unemployment rate for under-25s in the Netherlands is below 1 per cent. In the UK, it is closer to 4 per cent. The difference is not a matter of luck or economic structure it is a matter of design.
British ministers, led by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, have spent the past week in Rotterdam and Amsterdam observing the system in action. They visited a ‘werkplein’ or work square, where job centres, training providers, and employers share physical space. Here, a young person can walk in and, within hours, have a schedule of interviews and skill assessments mapped out. The physical co-location is deliberate it breaks down the silos that plague the UK’s fragmented system.
But the model goes deeper than logistics. There is a cultural shift, one that the Dutch call ‘borgen’, or a sense of collective responsibility. Employers are expected to offer ‘proefplaatsingen’ or trial placements, often with government subsidies covering wages for the first six months. Failure to engage carries reputational and financial penalties. This is not a system built on trust it is built on accountability.
Critics on the British side have raised concerns about cost and scale. The Dutch spend approximately 0.4 per cent of GDP on active labour market policies for youth. The UK spends 0.2 per cent. Doubling that would require significant political will, especially in an era of fiscal austerity. However, the cost of doing nothing is higher. The Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates that each NEET costs the UK economy an average of £56,000 over their lifetime in lost earnings, health costs, and social benefits.
There is also a question of culture. The Netherlands has a decentralised governance structure, where municipalities have significant autonomy and funding. The UK is far more centralised, with Whitehall controlling the purse strings. Could a localised model work in a country where job centres are run from London? Early pilots in Greater Manchester and the West Midlands suggest it could, but only if there is a radical transfer of power and budget.
Dr. Helena Vance, a labour market analyst at the Centre for Social Justice, noted that the Dutch model is not a silver bullet. “It works because everyone knows their role. The state, the employer, the young person they are all bound by a contract. In the UK, we have a lot of well intentioned schemes. But they are optional. They lack teeth.”
As British ministers board their planes back to London, they carry with them a detailed proposal. The question is whether Westminster can absorb the Dutch lessons. Will we see a ‘No Dead Ends’ bill in the next King’s Speech? Or will it gather dust alongside other imported ideas, a reminder that good policy is not just about design but about the courage to implement.
For now, the Dutch are watching with polite curiosity. They have built something that works. The rest of Europe is taking notes.
