I'm a third-year PhD student at a university in the Netherlands. The program is normally four years but students finish averagely in 4.5 years. By the end of each year we have progress evaluation. The first and second went well, just some advice, nothing critical. However, about 10 days ago I received a shocking feedback from my supervisor saying that it's better to quit because we (the committee) don't think you will be able to finish. Me and my supervisor then discussed things back and forth, and I argued that I had big delays due to covid and he agreed with me, but still the advice is to stop. And if I want to continue I have to try to find something (somehow) in 3 months and present again in front of different committee. And he won't be there.
The thing is, we have very bad data. Some interesting insights but his general expression is that we can't publish anything out of it. Of course he is stressed about the grant he got for the project and that the project didn't work as desired, but does that give him the right to want to terminate my PhD?
The thing is I'm still in shock and don't understand why this is happening. And more, why now? If I was a bad PhD, why not let me go before?
I'm sorry I'm just sad and confused at the moment. I don't know where to go and whom to ask for advice.
Edit: so the committee is pretty much useless and the supervisor is not interested in my data or PhD anymore. He can't however effectively terminate my contract, I can stay but mostly no degree in the end.
Should I fight against that somehow? Should I ask for ombudsman advice? Or maybe just cut loses with all the stress and anxiety I'm getting from all this?
Update: the ombudsman sympathized and suggested to leave once I manage to find work somewhere else.