Parliamentary committees and working groups find it difficult to find MPs who still want to do work ‘behind the scenes’. Committee members also regularly fail to show up. Twelve of the twenty groups missed at least half of the meetings of the standing committees of which they are members.
Also read the research story accompanying this news: Rather in the plenary room and on TV, than in a committee room afterwards
This is apparent from figures from the information system of the House of Representatives that NRC has seen, supplemented with discussions with members of parliament.
Groups are failing due to the struggle for visibility in political debates. This works better for debates in the plenary room, which are more often on TV, than in smaller rooms elsewhere in the House of Representatives. Political fragmentation also plays a role. As a result, political groups are smaller on average, and more tasks are assigned to individual members of the House of Representatives.
Committees form the backbone of the House of Representatives. They ensure that it can properly perform its supervisory and legislative task. In the standing committees – linked to spokespersons for members of the House of Representatives – (legislative) proposals and plans of the cabinet are discussed and assessed. Committee members often conduct their own investigations, by making working visits and holding hearings.
There are also ‘extra’ committees and working groups. The first are concerned with the organization of the House, such as the Committee on Procedures, or deal with a specific subject, such as the Committee for the Intelligence and Security Services or a parliamentary committee of inquiry. Working groups do not so much check, but come up with recommendations after research. MPs say that it is especially difficult for the ‘extra’ committees and working groups to find enough members, because they are not linked to spokespersons.
PVV and FVD relatively often absent
The attendance figures of the standing committees that NRC looked at – over the period April 12, 2021 to April 12, 2022 – show that PVV and FVD in particular are relatively often absent from meetings. For example, FVD (5 seats) attended more than half as many meetings as the equally large Christian Union faction. The PVV (17 seats) attended about half as many meetings than the smaller CDA (14 seats).
FVD says it sees no need to attend all committee meetings. According to the party spokesperson, FVD believes that the committee work has become too much “to a kind of top of the civil service. FVD prefers to focus on where we want to go as a country and why, so that we – whatever comes our way – know which course to take”. The PVV faction did not respond, despite repeated requests from NRC.
The smaller the group, the more difficult it is to attend all meetings. The small groups are therefore forced to miss more often at, for example, procedural meetings. “As a small group, it is difficult to do all the Chamber chores,” says parliamentary historian Bert van den Braak. “In the past, fractions were much larger.”
Member of Parliament Salima Belhaj (D66) chairs the parliamentary inquiry committee on the Allowances Affair. In that role she noticed how difficult it is to recruit members for an extra committee. “A lot of people said they were busy.” Belhaj thinks this has to do with the fragmentation in politics. “I especially see the small groups struggling.”
SGP party chairman Kees van der Staaij points out that some groups judge their members on visibility. “Then you might opt for a plenary debate rather than a procedural meeting, because the latter does not contain any information.” spotlights† Van den Braak: „Visibility in the media has become more important to remain in the House of Representatives. With a view to the re-elections, the choice to go to a plenary debate instead of a procedural meeting is of course an easy one.”
Preferably not in a room p. 8-9
A version of this article also appeared in NRC in the morning of April 19, 2022