“There is an incredible sewage smell here,” says Member of Parliament Gideon van Meijeren (Forum for Democracy), while he looks into the camera with a smile. Van Meijeren is filmed walking in the wing where the parliamentary press works. He steps up to .’s office Heart of the Netherlands-reporter Merel Ek, from whom he wants to get a story about a question that Ek asked last week about the interpretation of the word liquidate. Ek says that she does not want to talk with the camera on, whereupon Van Meijeren and his employee pretend to switch off the camera. They still record the conversation and broadcast it. It is the first part, says Van Meijeren, of the series Sewer rats unmasked.
Also read: Editor-in-chief Hart van Nederland: ‘Critique of journalism is allowed, but in a normal way’
FVD published the more than ten-minute film on Sunday afternoon, with a photo of Ek in the announcement. And with that, the party (five seats) again rewrote the rules in parliament for itself, as so often in recent years. When the House of Representatives kept distance rules during the corona crisis, FVD members came very close to colleagues and Chamber staff. Colleagues from other groups are attacked in videos on the YouTube channel, or in debates. Cabinet members are made suspect and against Member of Parliament Sjoerd Sjoerdsma (D66) was threatened with “tribunals” by FVD member Pepijn van Houwelingen. In NRC MPs told last weekend how they are massively threatened and harassed online by FVD supporters and anonymous trolls.
Dual relationship with media
The relationship with the media is always twofold: FVD needs and receives ample attention, but it also attacks journalism as part of the incumbent. It’s something editors struggle with. There is no cordon sanitaire in the Netherlands. And so journalists have to constantly weigh up: do we report this or not? It often leads to a hedge of journalists who question FVD members.
Typical is a video that FVD distributed after the temporary suspension of party chairman Thierry Baudet. A majority of the House of Representatives agreed with this, because Baudet refuses to give up his additional positions and the income from them. The video shows how Baudet speaks to many journalists. The title: ‘Pershyenas DIVE on Thierry Baudet after suspension’.
Also read this article: The House of Representatives is an ‘extremely unsafe’ workplace, MPs say
Incidentally, the FVD method is not new. In 2016, the Denk party already referred to journalism as “the fourth power”, which acted as a “gatekeeper of the established order”. PVV leader Geert Wilders wrote on Twitter last year: “Journalists are – with exceptions – just scum from the ledge.” And less than an hour after the FVD video was posted, PVV leader Geert Wilders tweeted about Cees van der Laan, the editor-in-chief of Fidelity. Who had written about the PVV leader that “With these kind of parliamentarians, Putin’s Russia is brought in.” In doing so, the editor had, in Wilders’ words, ‘definitely manifested himself as the greatest enemy of our democracy, freedom and of the PVV”.
Increasingly extreme behavior
There is a pattern with FVD. In addition to substantive radicalization, the behavior of FVD MPs is also becoming increasingly extreme. What stands out time and again when FVD violates the existing standards are two mechanisms: great moral indignation and hardly any real consequences – except for the temporary suspension of Baudet. This is also the case now. Several cabinet members tweeted disapproving words (the cabinet agreed to respond unanimously and disapprovingly to FVD). Prime Minister Mark Rutte (VVD) called it “a new low”.
Also read this opinion piece: Now it’s the media’s turn: take megaphone from FVD members
At the initiative of Volt party leader Laurens Dassen, a group of centre-left groups is meeting to explore whether the Rules of Procedure can be amended to ensure that journalists “from now on are free from these kinds of intimidating practices,” Dassen said. Violation of this rule should be punished.
‘Sharpen rules’
Speaker of the House of Representatives Vera Bergkamp (D66), who is responsible for security in the House of Representatives, had tried to contact Van Meijeren on Sunday. She didn’t answer when she called. She then sent him a text message. On Monday, Bergkamp said in a written response that it would investigate “whether rules should and can be tightened. But beyond the rules, this is inappropriate and unheard of.”
Lately, it has been much more about the feeling of insecurity in the House of Representatives building. And often there was criticism of the protection that the chairman could offer employees in vulnerable positions. Revelations about cross-border behavior by members of the House of Representatives and former Speaker of the House Khadija Arib to (civil) employees showed that little has been done to protect people who work in the building every day. To a certain extent, this also applies to journalists. Everyone who works in the building can come together in the hallway. Members of Parliament and journalists can always visit each other.
The rules always lag behind the act. For example, the House of Representatives already has extensive regulations for making recordings in the House of Representatives building. But: they are written for journalists, not for politicians. For example, it is not allowed “to address MPs and/or ministers with recording equipment switched on, unless they have given permission to do so”. But nothing is said about journalists. The Parliamentary Press Association will discuss this with the professional group and with Bergkamp.
Also read this article: What should the media do with FVD? Ignore or name? Invite or exclude?