During the formation of the first Purple cabinet (PvdA, VVD and D66) in 1994, PvdA leader Wim Kok was faced with a problem: as the leader of the largest party, he would become prime minister, but his fellow party leaders Frits Bolkestein (VVD) and Hans van Mierlo (D66) wanted to remain party leader. In this way they could exert maximum influence on this historic political experiment, the first cabinet in parliamentary history without confessionals. Bolkestein could not be persuaded to go to the cabinet, and continued to add color to his party in the following years as party chairman. Van Mierlo allowed himself to be persuaded to become Minister of Foreign Affairs, to Kok’s relief. A politician of his stature in the Chamber is dangerous for a cabinet, Kok understood. It is a story from a time when the House of Representatives was still regarded as the highest attainable stage in politics. Policy was made in the cabinet, politics and polemics were practiced in the Chamber.
What is left of the reputation of the House of Representatives? To ask the question is to answer it. Parliament has been fragmented into 21 factions, and partly because of this, it has lost a lot of authority and influence. The Chamber makes laws, controls the government and represents the population. But all three tasks have lost quality. Legislation is tough, takes a lot of time and generates little airtime, and is therefore no longer popular. Coalition parties are alien to dualism. The radical right wing is too often irrelevant, because opposition is more than submitting unsuccessful motions of no confidence. Dozens of MPs already say they do not want to return after the elections. The exodus of the House of Representatives is regrettable, but also explicable. The work is heavy, members of parliament receive threats and are less and less able to carry out their supervisory and legislative tasks. In short, it has become a thankless profession.
It is quite sad that the long list of departing MPs contains many names of representatives who understand their profession. To name a few: Renske Leijten (SP) played a crucial role in bringing the Supplements scandal to the surface. Farid Azarkan (Denk) continued to point out the racist undertones of this file. With his mildly critical attitude, Kees van der Staaij (SGP) was indispensable in many polarized debates. Steven van Weijenberg (D66) and Corinne Ellemeet (GroenLinks) are enthusiastic MPs with immense dossier knowledge. And Sylvana Simons (BIJ1) introduced the subject of institutional racism in the institutions in The Hague. They are all MPs who negate the image of parliament as a toothless administrative body. A parliamentary inquiry into the allowances brought down the Rutte III cabinet. The parliamentary inquiry into gas extraction in Groningen was substantively thorough and merciless. The Chamber still matters, despite the fact that after four Rutte cabinets it seems that the whole of The Hague is tired, and yearns for a new era without Rutte’s suffocating blanket.
Increased workload and the overheating of the social debate are two ingredients mentioned by many leavers. And both developments are worrying. The threats MPs are exposed to deserve much more care and attention, because they eat away at the roots of democracy. Members of parliament are often afraid to talk about this, which is why the subject remains under the radar.
Volt and ChristenUnie made a bold proposal this week about tackling the workload: they want to expand the Chamber from 150 to 250 members. That’s a good and nice idea. It could benefit the legislative and scrutinizing work of the Chamber. There is also a historical argument: Rudolph Thorbecke, the man behind the Constitution of 1848, had already thought that the House should grow with the population. That only happened once: in 1956 (from 100 to 150 members). But expanding now to deal with the high workload is a step too fast and smacks of symptom control. The nature of the work must first change. The Chamber does many tasks that are not necessary. The endless jumble of pointless motions, which are voted on every Tuesday, could be much shorter. Members of parliament do not always have to score, they do not have to be constantly in the picture, and they should not be persuaded to do so by their party leader or spokesperson. The long breath pays off, as the digging in the Supplements scandal and ‘Groningen’ proved. First, the House of Representatives must get its own priorities back in order, then expansion is a good idea.
A version of this article also appeared in the newspaper on September 2, 2023.