Rutte: debate was ‘an example of how you have dilemmas in this profession’ | Inland

The fact that Hugo de Jonge came to Parliament as a former corona minister to explain his involvement in the face mask deal with Sywert van Lienden, Rutte finds ‘vulnerable under constitutional law’, but can be defended. Whether this will happen more often in the future is still uncertain, according to Rutte. “Deloitte conducts that investigation, that is forensic investigation. But I also understand that because of the publicity in recent weeks, the House wants to know more about this. That is a quest.”

Deloitte’s investigation “takes an awfully long time”, Rutte acknowledges. “Because forensics is terribly complicated.” He doesn’t rule out the possibility that there will be more surprises there. “Yesterday it was about what Hugo de Jonge sent, but it is possible that the Deloitte investigation will show more.”

Motions of no confidence and disapproval

During the debate, De Jonge received motions of no confidence and disapproval, but he survived because a majority voted against them. During the debate on the face mask deal, the House of Representatives strongly criticized the cabinet on Thursday, because Helder had sent a whole series of apps at De Jonge’s request, while the House had previously insisted on a factual statement and did not receive it. Apparently, it is only possible to provide information if De Jonge gives the green light, was the feeling that was alive in the House. Several opposition members, Jesse Klaver of GL in the lead, discerned the ‘old management culture’ in this.

Rutte does not think that this is an example of poor information provision to the House. “No, it is an example of the joint search for how transparency can be improved. The solution chosen here is that Hugo de Jonge shares what he has with the House, and also outlines a context for it. It is not a matter of documents that are not allowed to come out, because that investigation will also come.” Deloitte is investigating ‘millions of documents’, according to the prime minister.

According to Rutte, it is ‘right’ that De Jonge went through the dust during the debate, partly because of his contact with Van Lienden. “That’s how it should be. If you make a mistake, you put it right,” says Rutte.

Rutte does not recognize the image that De Jonge would have been unfair. “People want an explanation, and what I found the strength of yesterday’s debate is that it took extensive time. My observation is that people are willing to listen to explanations, from someone who wants to show how it is. And my political conclusion here is that the trust is still there.”

In de podcast Afhameren political commentator Wouter de Winther looks back on the most striking moments from the debate:

–