It is a true theater performance in the Meppel city council tonight. That is perhaps not surprising when it comes to the treatment of cultural policy for the coming years. But the script was very difficult to follow.
A majority in the municipal council ultimately agrees with the basis for the cultural policy prescribed by the alderman. There are no real concrete things in there. It mainly concerns three principles: that culture is indispensable for growing children and young people, that culture must be accessible and available to everyone and that culture is a means to support goals in the social domain. The councilor is now taking this to the cultural sector to formulate a policy.
It’s a heated evening. “Just keep calm”, the mayor has to intervene when Xander Topma (SP) and Elisabeth Bakkenes (Sterk Meppel) clash and start talking at the same time. That’s not even so much about culture. It is mainly about how politics is done, through backroom politics, according to Topma.
It is not the first time that politicians in Meppel are talking about the present document. Most factions thought it was too vague and not specific enough. In the meantime, they sat down together to discuss the direction they wanted to go. This resulted in a list of topics that should be addressed in the document. CDA, ChristenUnie, D66, GroenLinks, PvdA and Sterk Meppel agreed on this between the previous meeting and this one. That is what Topma calls backroom politics.
In concrete terms, it is not yet a real cultural policy. It is officially a cultural memorandum. Or, to make it difficult: “This is more like a cultural vision,” says Anouk de Vlieg, leader of GroenLinks. “There is quite a bit missing in this memorandum. Even if we adopt it as a vision,” adds Elisabath Bakkenes on behalf of Sterk Meppel. And Ina Booij (Christian Union): “We are happy with the list that has now been added. Without it we would have voted against this culture memorandum, which would be a shame because as a cultural vision it was a good one.”
The VVD and SP are the only ones who are not very happy with the list. They find the councilor’s document acceptable, as the elaboration still takes place afterwards. Then it should not be boarded up, is the view of the two parties. Topma continues with his criticism of the ‘shopping list’, as he calls it. “Which direction do you want to go now? The topics do not state what you want to do with them. So you can still go in any direction.”
Councilor Jeannet Bos can live with the list. “These are all points of interest. That’s fine. But I would have liked to see a little more explanation as to what exactly you want. But we can certainly pay more attention to this.” Topma is therefore concerned: “So the municipal council can now simply list those points and say what they think is a good idea or not. What do you gain from it in terms of content? I find it laughable.”
Annie Huisman briefly explains the purpose of the list. “We would simply like to see these topics reflected in the culture memorandum.”
In any case, it was a real art for residents to follow the debate about culture in Meppel.