Final balance of the House debate: support for energy price ceiling, also for SMEs and associations

The House of Representatives supports the idea of a partial price ceiling for the energy bill. But the cabinet still has to do a lot of homework to make it fair for everyone for whom the energy compensation is intended, says the House.

This is one of the most important results of the General Political Reflections, the two-day debate about the Prinsjesdagstukken. Around midnight, when the House had voted on some sixty motions, the debate was finished.

PvdA and GroenLinks believe that the price ceiling should take more account of people who have a high electricity consumption because they no longer use gas. This also applies to families living in medium-sized terraced houses. A majority of Parliament supports this.

Badly insulated

The House also supported the proposal to give tenants of homes that are poorly insulated the right to a rent reduction. There was also a majority in favour of BBB‘s proposal to give more money to people who have to burn a lot for medical reasons.

In addition, on the initiative of D66, PvdA and GroenLinks, the House wants schools and cultural institutions to receive energy aid, just like SMEs that consume a lot of energy. At the suggestion of the CDA, associations, sports clubs, swimming pools and other social facilities have been added.

The SP and the ChristenUnie received the House for an investigation into the energy market. The cabinet must investigate how energy consumers and public interests can be better protected. The current gas crisis has made us aware of the disadvantages of liberalization and vulnerable dependency, say the parties.

Next year, many billions of euros in taxpayers’ money will be needed to keep families and businesses financially afloat. These are in addition to the 17 billion euros that the cabinet had already booked for purchasing power improvement.

It will take a few more weeks before there is more clarity about the details of the energy ceiling.

See a summary of the debate about purchasing power and energy prices here:

The members of the cabinet were united and regularly had friendly meetings. A day earlier, they left the room in protest at the words of FVD leader Baudet. Now it was seen that this action of solidarity had a positive effect on the cabinet.

Think leader Azarkan returned to this action on the second day of the debate. He found it incomprehensible that no one now did anything to the words of PVV leader Wilders that Islam is not a religion, but โ€œan ideology of hate and terrorโ€.

He told Wilders that the elderly couple living in poverty, who were used as an example by Wilders, would be helped by an Islamic neighbor. โ€œThese are the people Mr. Wilders cares about, who he hates, who he wants to take away from the Koran and their mosques.โ€

Azarkan asked the House and Cabinet to show solidarity with the โ€œmillion Muslims who are destroyed by Geert Wilders every time every debate.โ€

After his speech, an agreeing table roll from the House of Representatives and box K followed:

At the end of the debate, Prime Minister Rutte concluded that the debate had been about the โ€œbig questionsโ€ of the Netherlands, such as nitrogen, purchasing power but also about support for Ukraine. He felt that there was a โ€œfirm, respectfulโ€ debate. โ€œIt shows that, more than ever, our parliamentary democracy works.โ€

Rutte is now at the United Nations in New York. Deputy Prime Minister Kaag will chair the Council of Ministers next day.