CDA has external research carried out into head of list elections

The CDA is once again investigating the list-puller election that Hugo de Jonge narrowly won from Pieter Omtzigt. Two losers, Member of Parliament Omtzigt and State Secretary Mona Keijzer, asked the party executive last week for an explanation of voting irregularities.

The party has “submitted a number of questions to an external and independent party”, party chairman Rutger Ploum says. “In this way we want to do justice to the outcome.”

Omtzigt was defeated in the internal CDA election in mid-July by Minister De Jonge: he received 50.7% of the votes in the decisive round and Omtzigt 49.3%. According to Ploum, this result is not up for discussion. “We have one head of the list and that’s Hugo de Jonge.”

According to Ploum, Omtzigt confirmed today that the result is as it is:

At that time, the CDA party board announced that it had already been investigated during the term of the elections whether there were any technical errors and that these turned out not to be there. Omtzigt then stated that he was very curious about the exact outcome of the investigation. However, he did emphasise that he did not think that the results were actually any different

Later Keijzer also said that she does not doubt the outcome. “But if at any point there’s a question mark, you have to figure it out to end the discussion.”

The brand-new list puller said last week that there were all kinds of checks and balances built into the vote:

Today, the Lower House of the CDA is gathered in the Arnhem Zoo Burgers Zoo for a ‘heath day’. According to Ploum, the new investigation has been ordered as a result of “good talks” that had already taken place last weekend.

Member of Parliament Rene Peters twittered a picture of the “golden duo” De Jonge and his running mate Omtzigt on the heathday:

We don’t know who’s doing the new research. Ploum says that the outcome will be announced “in the short term”.

The list-puller election that has so much to do now, was already the second. The internet vote was repeated once because the CCeit was able to demonstrate with the help of researchers that the election was unsafe.