There was new impetus, and there was old impetus, this week in the House of Representatives. You could see the old with Prime Minister Mark Rutte. In November he promised that a cabinet with the same parties as in Rutte III would be very different. There was ‘more impetus’. In the debate on the government statement, on Tuesday and Wednesday, it turned out that much is still unclear and uncertain about Rutte IV, but that Rutte himself has at least regained his old élan.
That he had almost fallen into the political abyss last spring – nobody noticed it yet. He was as flexible as ever, humbled because he couldn’t afford any other attitude – the cabinet needs opposition support in the Senate – and cheerful and cheerful from the first to the last second of the debate.
Also read: Rutte is completely old again, sees the House of Representatives
The new impetus had to do with the House of Representatives itself: most of the group leaders refused to stand by any longer as PVV and FVD lash out at other politicians, Muslims and journalists. They demanded action, and after three days of regularly restless debates, Chamber President Vera Bergkamp unexpectedly showed it: she did not let FVD member Gideon van Meijeren finish when he acknowledged in a debate about corona that he calls on citizens not to comply with the law. An unprecedented step: the freedom to say anything is almost untouchable in the House, now a line has actually been drawn.
‘Take that back’
On Tuesday, on the first day of the debate on the government statement, Bergkamp did not dare to do that at all with Geert Wilders. About the new Minister of Justice, Dilan Yesilgöz, the PVV leader tweeted: „A VVD member of Turkish descent on Justice. And let’s just hope she doesn’t lift my security because of course they prefer to see me disappear under the grass.” Take that back, said Jan Paternotte (D66). “Not in a hundred thousand years,” said Wilders.
It was the start of a long tirade by Wilders against politicians and citizens with an Islamic background and against “the lackey of power”: the press. Jesse Klaver (GroenLinks) asked Bergkamp to intervene. “Not everything can be said in this room. Racism is not normal. Not on the street and not in the House of Representatives.”
Head rag tax, fake parliament: Wilders has not shunned harsh words about Muslims and the rule of law for years. He previously called D66 leader Sigrid Kaag ‘witch’ and ‘traitor’. “We have all been much too soft on that,” said Klaver. The acclaim for Klaver was great. Perhaps mainly because the threats against politicians outside the House are becoming increasingly serious.
Under the Rules of Procedure, the Chamber President may act against insulting expressions, disturbance of the peace or calls for illegal acts – but Bergkamp wants to be a neutral President. That has a limit, many MPs now believe, and that was reached this week. Bergkamp didn’t seem to know what to do with the fuss. She pointed out that there will be a separate debate about manners in the House of Representatives. Couldn’t they talk more about it then?
‘Well, well, well’, said Vera Bergkamp to FVD member Van Meijeren. ‘Tasteless’
At the end of the debate there was a motion by Gert-Jan Segers (ChristenUnie), co-signed by ten other parties, to commission a “broadly composed committee” to investigate the effect of “radicalization and political polarization”. Only PVV and FVD voted against.
That was Wednesday. A day later, in a debate about corona, Bergkamp suddenly intervened, when Van Meijeren started talking about civil disobedience. From the cabinet section, Rutte had been busy gesturing to Bergkamp that it had to stop, and he nodded when she said: “Inciting non-compliance with legislation is contrary to our Rules of Procedure. That is stated in Article 8(16). Moments later, she intervened again. Van Meijeren said that Ernst Kuipers had become Minister of Health “by licking up and pedaling down”. Bergkamp: „Well, well, well, this is tasteless again. This is on the man, on the person. Don’t do that.”
Also read: the man who threatened Kaag with a burning torch wants to ‘die for the Netherlands’
Will she keep this up? Will she say something about it next time when Wilders, like Tuesday, starts talking about “African and Arab packs” that “hunt the ordinary Dutchman as prey”? Many MPs hope so, and at the same time there is discomfort: parties such as PVV and FVD live in commotion and seem to want nothing more, they think from other parties, than to be silenced.
Prime Minister’s Box
The unrest about Bergkamp and Wilders diverted the attention of Rutte IV. In the coming period, that cabinet will have to look for support from the opposition, in order to be able to get the plans through in the Senate as well – the VVD, D66, CDA and ChristenUnie do not have a majority in the senate. And so the opposition now wanted to know what the intention was of the billions extra that the cabinet has for the climate, how youth care can still function if the cutbacks are continued there, or nursing home care. What could retirees actually count on if the state pension is really not allowed to increase in line with the higher minimum wage?
Rutte couldn’t say it yet, even after a formation of almost a year. The Chamber, he said, would hear about it all in the coming months. At the end he did not leave the room via the cabinet section, but past the MPs. Smiling, handing out compliments. And whoever wanted that, got a box from him.