The way Khadija Arib has managed to turn the accusation of unfair treatment of the House staff into a personal feud between her and Vera Bergkamp could be called clever, were it not so sad. After the first day, it was no longer the employees of the then Speaker of the House, who, if the allegations are correct, led a reign of terror for six years, but of Arib himself, who would be stabbed in the back. Van Bergkamp.
What nonsense. As if Vera Bergkamp had something to do with her predecessor. If so, it would have already happened two years ago, when Bergkamp defeated her presidential competitor in a round with large numbers (74 to 38). Obviously this was due to an agreement between VVD and D66, the two winners of the elections. There was no reason for a merciless showdown with Arib. It did not matter.
That Arib only points the finger at Bergkamp is a sign of the evil genius. As if Bergkamp had decided on her own to investigate the behavior of her predecessor. Arib knows full well that the presidency made that decision unanimously: the presidency in which VVD, D66, PVV, CDA, SP, PvdA, GroenLinks and Party for the Animals sit. Eight parties, they don’t all have a bone to choose with the former Speaker of the House, do they?
The fact that Henk Nijboer of the PvdA also supports the investigation into Arib is not a betrayal of a party mate as many Social Democrats think, but it shows a difficult but conscious and well-considered choice. He could also have abstained. But apparently the complaints from House staff were so serious that Nijboer had no other choice. It is sad that he is resentful of his fellow party members.
The Labor Party knows best. Arib’s difficult relationships with his employees were well known in the group. Party president Attje Kuiken has a lot to explain to supporters during today’s Political Members Council. In the letter of invitation, party president Esther-Mirjam Sent writes “that we will not leave anyone in the cold”. A great goal that applies not only to Arib but also to the staff of the Chamber.
Of course, there is also support for Arib in the party. That she would be thrown in front of the bus, that the presidency has no right to conduct an investigation, that it is shameful that she had to read the investigation in the newspaper. It will be all. But isn’t it much more important that 23 employees complained about the then Speaker of the House in six years? Complaints for which nothing has been done, but which are now endorsed by the court chancellery, the director and the works council of the House of Representatives.
The time has come to shift the focus to employees who claim to have suffered from Arib’s treatment for years. The stories of people who were banned, who were humiliated for being taken out of their offices, who were no longer welcome at meetings because their opinion didn’t matter. Those stories were told in this place six years ago. Arib denied and the rest of the Chamber remained silent. Because finally there was a president who could conduct debates and maintain order. The rest was secondary.
But the employees of the Chamber were pleased with the attention then, even if it brought them nothing. Six years later, everyone’s complaints are heard, right up to the state attorney. There will be an end to the idea that you are alone, that you may just be yourself, that no one will give you a hand. For this reason alone, a formal investigation is a form of recognition. Whether you pay or not.
/nginx/o/2022/10/08/14885299t1h2f25.png?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)