Bergkamp’s presidency was under fire from day one | Politics

From the day she was elected president of the House of Representatives, Vera Bergkamp has been under fire. A large part of the opposition would have preferred to see someone from their midst in the chair on April 7, 2021, for example the former chairman Kadija Arib (PvdA), defeated by Bergkamp. But the D66 MP received the most votes, including from the largest party, the VVD.

It immediately fueled speculation that a handshake had preceded the election. D66 and VVD were negotiating about the formation of a new cabinet. VVD Prime Minister Rutte had just barely survived the infamous 1 April debate after D66, among others, did not support a vote of no confidence. And now the VVD supported the D66 candidate. The leader of the largest opposition party PVV, Geert Wilders, has since repeated time and again that Bergkamp owed her position to a handshake in the backrooms.

Bergkamp became President of the House at a time when the House was more fragmented than ever. The Chamber counted no less than seventeen parties when they took office, equaling the record from 1918. And that number grew to 21 after various splits. Fractions that sometimes shout out each other for attention. And although agreements were made about manners, Bergkamp sometimes struggled to maintain them.

The low point was the General Political Reflections in 2022 when the cabinet demonstratively walked away from the debate and refused to return unless Bergkamp forced MP Thierry Baudet to take back his words. Baudet had suggested that D66 minister Sigrid Kaag would have received spy training.

Later that year, Bergkamp was attacked by her predecessor Arib. He said that Bergkamp had stabbed her in the back. Bergkamp (incidentally with the support of other MPs in the presidium) had launched an investigation into Arib after (anonymous) accusations about too authoritarian behavior during the period that she was President of the House. Arib left because she felt she could no longer function credibly. The investigation appears to have reached an impasse.

Bergkamp defended himself by stating that the House of Representatives could not turn a blind eye if there were accusations from House staff about inappropriate behaviour. But the storm around her did not stop. Part of the House accused Bergkamp that she had gone beyond her book by having a Member of Parliament investigated. Members of parliament also accused her of wearing too big a pair of trousers in the Arib issue to boost her image as a sometimes powerless chairman.

The relentless criticism shows both Bergkamp’s discomfort with the presidency and the sour atmosphere in The Hague in recent years, with persistent suspicions being raised about others. It is therefore no surprise that she announced on Thursday that she would not be returning after the elections. In her farewell letter she sums up everything that has been set in motion under her presidency. For example, more has been invested in supporting Members of Parliament and voting takes place at more predictable times. Yet that is not how Bergkamp will be remembered.

It is bitter for her that in the years before that she was considered a relatively successful member of parliament as a Member of Parliament. She advocated, for example, the legalization of hemp cultivation (it led to the previous cabinet initiating a weed trial, which has still not got off the ground). She was a member of the parliamentary committee of inquiry that investigated the Fyra debacle and she helped ensure that religious schools were no longer allowed to refuse teachers just because of their sexual orientation.

Bergkamp is married and has two daughters. She does not yet know what she will do after the elections. “Until the elections, I will do everything in my power to serve the House,” she ends her suicide note.

Also listen to our podcast Politics Close, and subscribe via Spotify or Apple:

Watch all our videos about politics here: