Halsema got into trouble after a wob request from the Amsterdam student magazine Propria Cures, which showed that party planner Lennart Booij had been appointed as program director for the city anniversary at the beginning of 2020 and that he declared himself stupid: €10,000 per month for 20 hours of work per week. Halsema thought the hourly rate of 125 euros ‘a lot of money’, but not ‘exorbitant’.
The PvdD spoke of an appearance of favoritism because party planner Booij was an acquaintance of Halsema. He also assisted her during her application for mayor.
‘We don’t drink wine together’
“Booij is indeed part of my network, just like thousands of Amsterdammers. But he is not a friend, we don’t drink wine together, we are acquaintances,” Halsema said during the digital gathering. “I don’t do any favors for friends. That does not help the city and clashes with my constitutional views of good governance.”
That explanation was against the sore leg of SP leader Flentge. He thought that Halsema’s argument is ‘pretty much the definition of favoritism’. Much to the mayor’s anger. “You have no clue, except that I know him,” she snapped at him.
‘Obviously problem’
“The obviousness with which these jobs are distributed is the problem,” said Flentge, who told Halsema that as a controlling councilor he “had nothing to prove”. “Apparently you are so comfortable with the debate that you forget that reflecting does not mean that you are clean.”
According to the PvdD, the hint of favoritism was reinforced because the job was not put out to tender. According to Halsema, who had ‘called countless people in her network’, Booij was the perfect party planner, so that a tender was not necessary.
Deep through the dust
When the municipal secretary received the green light not to launch a tender, a contract was drawn up for 24 months, while the intention was 9 months. A mistake, said municipal secretary Teesink, who went through the dust and acknowledged that the contract was subject to tender throughout the 24 months. But according to Halsema, no rules were broken, she repeated several times.
Despite the intention to hire Booij for nine months, his job was tacitly renewed. Despite a signal from the personnel department that party planner Booij had been thrown out of the personnel system, his email went black and despite the fact that he ‘administratively did not exist’; his bills were simply paid. How is that possible, councilors wondered. Halsema spoke about system errors.
No hours specification
Many factions also fell out of their seats when it turned out that the municipality did not have an hour specification from Booij, much to the anger of the VVD. “There are so many people who work themselves out and self-employed people who account for up to half an hour. This cannot be the case,” said party leader Marianne Poot indignantly.
Many opposition parties were not satisfied with this and want to discuss the matter later in the council. For example, it remained unclear why the contract with Booij, which stated that he could work for 24 months and not the nine months for which permission had been given, was initially not included in the Wob documents. “I cannot explain it,” said Secretary Teesink, who emphasized that this contract was not subject to tender, because the intention was nine months.
Professor Kuypers (Radboud University), who is also a lawyer at AKD, has questions about this. It is about what is in the contract, including possible extensions and possibilities of extension. That duration is decisive. And not the intention, he concludes.
‘Story rattles’
“The story is rattling,” JA21 party chairman Annabel Nanninga points out. JA21, VVD and PvdD want an independent legal opinion as to whether the job should have been put out to tender. D66 would like an overview of the number of freelancers hired without a tender.
During the debate, Halsema acknowledged that mistakes had been made, that she bears administrative responsibility and said that she wants to use ‘open procedures’ in the future. Still, she couldn’t help sniggering. Councilors themselves could have been sharper. She was also outraged at the use of the word “party planner.”