Candidates finished with explanations, Chamber is going to vote on presidency

President-elect of Chamber Bergkamp denies with great certainty that agreements have been reached between VVD and D66 on the Presidency. Just like his party leader Wilders yesterday, PVV spokesman Markuszower criticized the comment made by D66 leader Kaag against VVD-foreman Rutte about Bergkamp‘s candidacy: โ€œBergkamp only applied after Kaag and Rutte had consulted on it,โ€ he said.

Markuszower suggested that D66 wanted a favor from the VVD in order to improve the atmosphere in the formation. The PVV’er spoke of a machination that erodes democracy.

VVD spokeswoman De Vries and her CDA colleague Kuik said that there are no agreements. According to them, these elections are an individual choice and MPs of VVD and CDA decide who they are voting for after the debate. Bergkamp itself called it a good practice to inform each other. โ€œNo more or less.โ€ She said she‘d like to be president on her own.

The House of Representatives has been debating the election of a new president since this morning. MPs from all political groups were able to ask questions to the three candidates, current Chairman Arib (PvdA) and its competitors Bergkamp (D66) and Bosma (PVV). Then follows the vote, possibly in several rounds.

Arib also said that the Chamber Presidency should never be part of negotiations in the formation. She stressed that she did not call anyone: ‘I have always done it on my own, sometimes contrary to the advice of my own group.

She has applied again because there are few long-sitting MPs. Arib himself has been in the Chamber since 1998, with a brief interruption. โ€œThe collective memory has not improved. I feel it as an assignment to use my experience for the new Chamber.โ€

On questions about this, Arib called an RTL article from February in which anonymous MPs criticized her โ€œa terrible pieceโ€. She stressed the importance of a safe environment, including for her. She said that she stood up for the Chamber and that she protested against things, for example, around the move: โ€œOnly when there are blows, does the President catch them.โ€

Bergkamp Connector

Bergkamp described himself as someone who emphasizes what connects people and who has an eye for minorities. She is also tenacious, according to her own words. She stressed that, even before she came to the Chamber, she often chaired meetings. โ€œAnd the Chairman of the Chamber is Champions League.โ€

Bosma said that last week the Chamber had a โ€œdeep shit-momentโ€. According to him, the Chamber has never been so confronted with its own powerlessness as in the debate on formation. He referred to the notorious passage in the notes of explorer Ollongren about CDA member of parliament Omtzigt (โ€œfunction elsewhereโ€) and called it a humiliation of the Chamber. Bosma believes that the Chamber is too often steered in the reeds and that this development has been going on for years.

Bosma no chairman

Think-member Van Baarle said that Bosma cannot become president because he โ€œsystematically excludes people with a migration backgroundโ€. According to him, Bosma cannot credibly receive a head of state from an Islamic country. Volt-foreman Dassen and Bij1 leader Simons expressed themselves in a similar way.

Van Baarle also pointed out that the PVV is for the acquisition of the right to vote for people with dual nationality. D66-MP Faster also stressed that.

Bosma replied that he is an impartial President and that he is implementing decisions taken by the Chamber, even if he disagrees with it. As an example, he gave that if the majority wanted a mosque in the Chamber building, he will make sure that it is there. โ€œI’ll open it if I have to.โ€

The debate also dealt with dual nationality for another reason. PVV spokesman Markuszower also said that Arib did a great job on the Presidency, but that the PVV has one formal objection to Arib: her dual nationality.

Dualism

Almost all MPs pointed out that the information from the cabinet to the Chamber should be improved and that there should be more dualism (a clear separation between the government that governs and the parliament that controls).

Particular attention should be paid to the opposition. All three candidates said that they want to do what is possible, but that on many points they also depend on what the House wants.