Is a permit for emergency shelter from asylum seekers priority from municipalities, or is that assumption correct? That idea lives, but research by Omroep Brabant within the municipality of Kaatsheuvel does not show that. Although clear communication with residents and local residents is very important. “Municipalities have to talk to local residents and explain well how things really work.”
The research editor of Omroep Brabant received tips on possible abuses in the run-up to the opening of the emergency shelter on the Dodenauweg in Kaatsheuvel, in February 2024. That is why Omroep Brabant submitted a WOO request in March 2024 at the municipality of Loon op Zand. From the approximately six thousand pages that have now become public a year later, no abuses come to the fore. They do give a glimpse into how things are going behind the scenes.
For example, it is striking that the procedures for the arrival of an emergency shelter are all quickly completed. For example when it comes to the necessary permits, but also practically arranging the shelter.
“Because it is a need, other procedures apply.”
Administrative expert Martijn van der Steen shed his light on the most striking conclusions from the WOO request. “It is an exceptional situation that requires exceptional measures. But it is important to explain that no priority is given to the emergency shelter on other applications for permits that residents are waiting for. Because it is a need, other procedures apply.”
If there is an emergency shelter for asylum seekers or refugees in a municipality, municipalities have to talk to local residents, says Van der Steen. “They must explain well that the permit for an emergency shelter is being treated differently than if someone wants to renovate his house.”
In the run -up to the opening of the shelter in Kaatsheuvel, the municipality organized various meetings with local residents. The municipality also communicated on social media about this. The active role of then mayor Hanne van Aart on social media was striking, in the beginning she often responded to people who were critical of the shelter and who absolutely did not like it.
“It is important to be able to bring bad news.”
Van der Steen sees a positive development in conversation with people. “It is important to be able to bring bad news. That you hear the anger of people and let them tell them that they are scared and angry. You have to listen and understand what their worries are and also understand that it is difficult for them. But that you hear it does not mean that you give people their way and that shelter will not come.”
The communication by municipalities is not going well everywhere and that regularly leads to criticism. For example, around an emergency shelter in the municipality of Maashorst played lawsuits. Residents found that the municipality had not involved enough local residents. Research by this broadcaster later showed that the municipality of Maashorst had consciously ignored advice from its own officials. In those advice it was recommended to involve as many residents as possible.
According to Van der Steen, municipalities are often willing to arrange a temporary emergency shelter, but they prefer not to a reception location for a longer period of time. Then there is no longer any need, but it is a long -term decision. Different rules apply to this.
At reception locations for a longer period of time there is often more and brighter criticism. That became clear in Berlicum in March this year. Campaigners threw eggs, torches and heavy fireworks because they were against the arrival of an AZC. Pork legs were also hung on a fence.
According to Van der Steen, it would help if there was more clarity from the national government about what they expect from municipalities. And that it forces municipalities to compensate for asylum seekers and refugees where necessary.
“Such as via the Spreading Act. Or a successor on that law, which can be adopted after the elections in October by the next cabinet and the new House of Representatives.” According to Van der Steen, the burden is in this way more fairly distributed over municipalities, municipalities can organize the shelter better and discuss them better with their residents.