ANPPeter Kwint (SP), Corinne Ellemeet (GroenLinks), René Peters (CDA)
The reasons given by MPs for their departure from the House of Representatives are obvious: from a dog job, opportunism and populism to too much work pressure and an inclement climate. What’s going on in parliament? And what needs to change?
News hour asked three departing parliamentarians: Corinne Ellemeet (GroenLinks), Peter Kwint (SP) and René Peters (CDA). All four will not return to the House of Representatives after the elections.
Kwint wrote in his farewell letter that he sometimes felt a physical revulsion when entering the Chamber Building. “That wasn’t every day, but I found myself increasingly at the end of the debate tending to think, OK, what have I really changed for someone?”
The SP member adds that this feeling gained momentum in the aftermath of the parliamentary committee of inquiry in Groningen, which investigated the earthquake problem and the handling of claims. “In addition, after the debate I had something like: we’ve all been working together for 2.5 years and I have the idea that they don’t quite understand it yet. That gave me an extra push towards the exit.”
A major problem in politics in The Hague is that the House does not perform its monitoring task properly, says Kwint. “I think the entire House should take that into account. Ultimately, we are in charge. Not a minister, not a ministry, not a cabinet. We are the ones who must control power. And if we see something that is wrong, we must also have the balls to make adjustments.”
Two installments
MP Ellemeet says she looks at it less cynically than her colleague. “I look back on those years in the Chamber with a good feeling.”
In her eyes, the fact that she is leaving the political arena again after two terms is not immediately a bad thing. “It was never a ‘life destination’ for me. I thought it was important to make a direct contribution to our democracy. And I dare say that with three passed own-initiative laws I have really changed something in the field of abortion and in the field of concern.”
According to Ellemeet, it is important to have both seasoned politicians and new, fresh faces in the House. “I think it’s good to have MPs with a great memory of what happened there, but I would think it would be a shame if we gave the signal: if you want to become a member of parliament, you must stay for at least twelve years.”
No social life
For CDA member Peters, the high workload was an important reason to throw in the towel. He emphasizes that he thinks membership of the House of Representatives is a wonderful craft, but that you can write a social life on your stomach.
In addition, Peters denounces the incentives that he believes prevail among politicians: “We have to sell a story. We have a problem with a perpetrator, victim and a hero, where the politician is the hero. That way we sell the story that everyone wants. hear, but it is always much more complicated than that. I would like it if we as a Chamber could go into much more depth: what is really going on?”
What needs to be improved?
For permanent and future MPs, Kwint hopes that the Chamber can take back control in the future. “In recent years, this has really fallen short.”
According to Kwint, the House must receive more support to achieve this. “For example, at the law office. These are people who help us to write down our impossible ideas in solid legal texts. They are great people, whom we occasionally overwhelm with proposals at the craziest times.”
For Ellemeet, the solution lies not only in better support, but also in expanding the Chamber itself. “For example, from 150 to 200 seats. Compared to countries around us, we have a small parliament. If you have to do five or six debates a week on your own, you can have a lot of support, but then you can’t live up to it yourself I think an enlargement of parliament is essential.”
2023-07-27 21:11:07
#leaving #change
