Oostbrug debate concludes: council accepts explanation and demands earlier updates

Amsterdam's city council concluded the Oostbrug debate on 2 September 2026 without a political reckoning for former alderman Melanie van der Horst. A majority accepted her explanation for not sharing the provisional €650–850 million estimate before the elections. At the same time, the council passed three motions requiring the executive to report major cost increases in infrastructure projects sooner. Nothing changed that evening about the Oostbrug's design, budget or timetable. For passengers on the Amsterdam ferries between the city centre and Amsterdam Noord, the ferry therefore remains the everyday crossing for now.

What the council decided in the concluding Oostbrug debate

The full city council returned on 2 September to the information Van der Horst had not published before the elections. Opposition parties had spoken in August of voter deception and damaged trust, but a majority now accepted her explanation that the interim estimate was insufficiently reliable and politically sensitive. Volt councillor Pim van Burk even apologised for his earlier language about voter deception, although he stressed that the council would have preferred to know the figures sooner. The SP and JA21 remained critical, but no no-confidence motion or other sanction against the former alderman followed. The tangible outcome was three adopted motions on better interim reporting, while the background to the cost jump remains available in our article on the Oostbrug estimate and the requested emergency debate.

Opposition criticism and support from within the coalition

VVD group leader Daan Wijnants, who had requested the emergency debate, called the alderman's conduct problematic on several levels. In his view Amsterdam residents were given an incomplete picture of whether a bridge over the IJ was feasible, while the council was left uninformed about an exorbitant cost increase for a landmark project. Stef Keij of Ja21 asked whether this was a misjudgement or a deliberate attempt to shape perception, arguing that denying what the city's own documents literally state undermines trust. Anna Krijger of the Party for the Animals said she was shocked by the released documents and believed the council could and should have been informed earlier, a view echoed by Denk, CDA, Volt and the SP. Coalition party Pro Amsterdam came to the alderman's defence instead: Carlo van Munster argued the decision was justifiable because studies were still running, and asked whether this is how the city throws its administrators under the bus. Even D66 asked pointed questions, with Sidney Cruickshank noting an internal memo stating that the interim estimate had to be available before the elections so the alderman could choose when to publish it.

Why the city says the figures could not be shared yet

The executive's line was that the estimate was simply not solid enough to brief the council properly. Elise Moeskops, who succeeded Van der Horst as alderman for mobility and public space, defended that choice in committee and said too little research had been done into the causes of the increase. She added a strikingly candid remark: she would have preferred that these amounts had not become public at all at this moment, because the timing was awkward. Van der Horst herself pointed out that the word "elections" means something different to civil servants than it does to politicians and the media, denoting mainly a period in which normal procedures work differently. She also stressed that administrative responsibility for the file now sits with her successor and that it is not her place to comment on that portfolio. Earlier she had called the allegation that she deliberately withheld information "a direct attack on my integrity" that damages trust in politics.

What this means for the Oostbrug timetable

The Oostbrug is the first of two planned fixed cycling and walking links across the central IJ, and current municipal planning targets completion around 2034. It would land between Azartplein on the KNSM-eiland and the Hamerkwartier in Noord, close to the existing F1 Eastern Ferry between Azartplein and Zamenhofstraat. That this planning has already slipped repeatedly is something we described in our article on the Oostbrug being delayed beyond 2034. A doubling of the estimate does not make further delay less likely, even though €650–850 million is explicitly an interim figure rather than a tender price. Moeskops expects to present a definitive estimate in the first half of 2027, after which the council will resume the substantive debate about the bridge and possible alternatives. Until that estimate arrives, any statement about the final budget or delivery date remains provisional.

Why this debate is also about the ferries

At first glance a council debate about disclosure feels far removed from the landing stage, but the two files are financially linked. Over the coming years Amsterdam has to pay simultaneously for new electric ferries, for enough crew on the existing fleet, and for a fixed crossing that now threatens to cost twice as much as planned. That tension is real, because the fleet needs attention now: the skipper shortage already forced GVB to cancel departures on the busiest crossings several times this summer. The debate about cheaper alternatives plays into it too, since the discussion around the IJ-klopper cycle tunnel gained new momentum precisely because of the high bridge estimate. How much pressure the system is actually under can be read in the ferry statistics, where passenger growth on the connections from Centraal Station and the NDSM wharf is clearly visible. Following the political discussion therefore means indirectly following the question of how much capacity will remain on the water a decade from now.

What ferry passengers should and should not expect

For your daily journey nothing changes as a result of the Oostbrug debate, and that is the most important message. No ferry line is being cut, no stop is closing and no timetable is being adjusted because of the three reporting motions. The next substantive decision point comes only after the city has developed the costs and plans further, with a definitive estimate expected in the first half of 2027. Anyone who wants to know when the next boat leaves is better served by one of the ferry apps than by planning news. We will keep tracking decisions about the Oostbrug, the Westbrug and other fixed crossings on the news index. Only a formal change to the design, budget or schedule of the Sprong over het IJ programme would amount to a genuine shift in direction.

Pont is not an official GVB product and is not affiliated with the City of Amsterdam, D66 or any of the parties involved. We summarise public reporting and published council information to explain what the outcome of the debate might mean for ferry passengers. The €650–850 million range is a provisional interim estimate rather than an agreed tender price, and 2034 is a target year rather than a guarantee. The three adopted motions concern disclosure and do not withdraw or reduce any ferry connection. Always check current GVB departure times and service information before you travel.