This study investigates the representative patterns of MPs with immigrant backgrounds in the case of the Netherlands. Departing from existing literature on minority representatives, we claim that minority representatives can adopt suppressive, as well as supportive, framings when addressing constituencies with whom they share similar backgrounds. A content analysis was conducted on the parliamentary work of minority representatives to detect which frames those representatives adopt when they address cultural and/or religious rights and liberties. As for explanatory variables, we examined the role of the retreat from multicultural policies in the Netherlands on the one hand and individual and group related variables on the other. Our content analysis reveals no fundamental linear shift towards more suppressive framing during the 2002–2017 period. Minority MPs from progressive parties are more likely to use supportive frames than those MPs from conservative parties. Coming from a Turkish background – the most organized ethnic group with the highest social capital in the country – significantly adds to the likelihood of a supportive form of representation. Gender is another significant variable explaining where minority representatives stand, with male MPs being more inclined to use supportive frames on ethnic and/or religious rights and liberties than female MPs.

这项研究调查了在荷兰的情况下具有移民背景的国会议员的代表性模式。与现有的关于少数派代表的文献不同，我们主张少数派代表在与具有相似背景的选区打交道时可以采用压制性和支持性的框架。对少数群体代表的议会工作进行了内容分析，以发现这些代表在处理文化和/或宗教权利与自由时采用的框架。至于解释变量，我们一方面考察了在荷兰多元文化政策退缩的作用，另一方面则考察了与个人和群体有关的变量。我们的内容分析显示，在2002年至2017年期间，没有朝着更具抑制性的框架发展的根本线性变化。来自进步党的少数民族议员比来自保守党的议员更倾向于使用支持性框架。来自土耳其的背景–该国是组织最严密的族群，拥有最高的社会资本–极大地增加了支持性代表形式的可能性。性别是另一个重要的变量，解释了少数群体代表的立场，男性议员比女性议员更倾向于在种族和/或宗教权利和自由方面使用支持性框架。