CDA motion quota without a chance. The House of Representatives would rather keep it with good intentions

‘Motie meter’ is on a white plate in one of the offices of the CDA in the Lower House. With a list of MPs and the number of motions they have submitted. The board is kept up to date. Financial spokesperson Inge van Dijk leads the list with 21 motions.

Since April, the Christian Democrats have kept the count of a self -imposed quota. They can only submit a total of 155 motions in the Lower House per year. If it is up to the CDA, there will be such a plate hanging on all the groups. The party wants to change the rules for MPs by making a motion quota mandatory. The calculation that the party devised for this: all groups would be entitled to 150 motions plus the number of seats they have in the Lower House. For the CDA (5 seats) that is 155. For the PVV (37) that would be 187. Moreover, the party argues that political groups may submit a total of two motions per debate.

Motions give the parliament some teeth and ensure that the parliament does not only bark, but sometimes also bites; not a parliamentary lamb, but a parliamentary lion

It is an attempt by the Christian Democrats to put an end to the “pushed through profiling” and “a permanent state of gasiness that the House of Representatives has fallen from,” said CDA leader Henri Bontenbal in the large debate room this Thursday.

For years, the number of motions submitted has been seen by MPs as a problem. More and more are being submitted in the past two decades. In the entire year 2014, almost 2900 motions were voted on, in 2024 about 4000.

Explosive rise

Already in 2019 a committee of MPs noticed that bowed over the household regulations of the House of Representatives that there was an “explosive rise” of chamber motions. There was, led by then SGP leader Kees van der Staaij, the committee stated, there was “excess,” which could lead to the “political effect” of a motion. But adjusting the rules did not find the committee a good idea at the time. That would affect the “rights” of MPs. “

Four years later, according to another committee of MPs, again under the leadership of Kees van der Staaij, nothing had changed. In fact, a record number of motions was submitted in 2022. According to the MPs, there would be two options: “Accepting that reducing the number of motions has not yet been successful, or consider more rigorous measures such as working with quota.”

In the debate in the Lower House, this Thursday, Bontenbal refers to it several times. It is not a CDA idea, he argues, it is the room itself who advised a quota on itself. The CDA now wants to take a “concrete step”.

‘Wanting’ on social media

But almost none of the parties feel something for the CDA proposal. Yes, there is wide in the room irritation about motions that would be absurd, or superfluous. They ask for expensive plans, without financial coverage for it. And above all: motions that are actually only meant to ‘flutter’ on social media. In the Lower House, self -reflection also sounded: MPs admitted that they are – in their own words but occasionally – guilty of these types of motions.

But a quota?

That would “limit the possibilities of MPs,” said Michiel van Nispen (SP). It has “influence on the freedom of MPs to deliberate,” said Laurens Dassen (Volt). “Motions give the parliament some teeth and ensure that the parliament does not only bark, but sometimes also bites; Not a parliamentary lamb, but a parliamentary lion, “said Gidi Markuszower of the PVV. And Esmah Lahlah van GroenLinks-PvdA feared that with a motion quota it would be a lot harder for a member of parliament to perform the controlling task. ” Moreover, several MPs wondered: what if the maximum for a fraction was already achieved in October?

Bontenbal continued to insist that there are more options for MPs than just motions to move the cabinet somewhere. Isn’t that also possible in debates, due to commitments from ministers? And, if necessary, via the media? The CDA leader further referred to parliamentary investigations and surveys, in which the House of Representatives always showed critical of their own functioning. “The core of the problem is that this House of Representatives is too busy with profiling and too little with the control of the government and its policy,” said Bontenbal. He led a plea “Slow Politics”.

Intention: more discipline

He only managed to convince Joost Eerdmans of Ja21, who could submit 151 motions with one seat in the Lower House according to the Bontenbal Quotum.

The rest of the room stops with a non -binding intention to show more discipline when submitting motions. And also: to talk to each other more often in the debate hall of the Lower House if they find that otherwise submit an unnecessary motion.

Alternatives to the CDA plan did not come to the frustration of Bontenbal. What did the debate end with? With his head in his hands, Bontenbal heard how Chamber President Martin Bosma had to say to Joost Eerdmans that he had to adjust his motions. There were two.

To share





Mail the editors