This week, Chamber President Vera Bergkamp was on the radio. The reporter wanted to know whether she could do anything against a Forum MP who had threatened D66 member Sjoerd Sjoerdsma. There was no answer. Whatever he tried, Bergkamp had resolved only to say that she wanted to talk to all party leaders about the language and manners in the House. After four minutes the interview came to a dead end and the Radio1 news was forced to go back to normal.
Fortunately, an hour later, former Speaker of the House Frans Weisglas reported on the same channel, who did clarify what powers the chairman of the parliament has: first ask whether the speaker wants to take back his threat; if not, the speaker may be banned from further participating in the debate. He could even be banned for a whole day. Bergkamp knew that, of course. But she didn’t say it to avoid the follow-up question to which she had no answer: why didn’t that happen?
–
–
Bergkamp wouldn’t have missed a bit of a firmer performance. I understand the fear of even more attention for the incident, which is completely in the vein of Baudet. Earlier this week, the Forum leader called the unvaccinated the new Jews. He does this, as he has announced more than once, to provoke, to shock, to draw attention to himself and his party. But it is nothing more than political harassment.
Just like Ferd Grapperhaus sings a song on TV about the missing face mask to attract attention, Baudet calls out all kinds of things with the same goal. That brat from Forum who wants to drag Sjoerdsma before a tribunal has no idea of the impact of his words. It was no threat, said Pepijn van Houwelingen; what else should it be?
His boss Baudet had already said that provocations are the basis of his party’s strategy. Shocking is the holy goal and it works well. Humberto Tan responded to Baudet’s claim that AIDS does not occur in white heterosexuals, with a well-chosen explanation. But does it help? Sigrid Kaag could not suppress her horror at a series of nonsense by Baudet. And Frans Weisglas had even had heart palpitations, he said, from the threat to Sjoerdsma.
–
–
History shows that we quickly get used to the roughened use of language in the House of Representatives. When SP star Jan Marijnissen said nonsense three times to PvdA minister Bert Koenders, we were quite shocked; You don’t say that to a minister. And Chamber President Gerdi Verbeet even withdrew Geert Wilders from speaking when he called PvdA minister Ella Vogelaar crazy. ‘Act normal man’ (Wilders-Rutte vice versa) was also not possible in our opinion. Now we shrug our shoulders at those kinds of comments; they seem rather petty now. Which we didn’t care about back then. Didn’t we have anything better to do?
But it goes from bad to worse. Wilders’ comment about fewer Moroccans went over the border, for which he was convicted by the judge. Calling ministers a liar is the order of the day. Putting Sigrid Kaag aside as a terrorist’s sweetheart, it can simply be said. At least it is allowed. We don’t see intervention happening.
–
–
Is the measure full now? Bergkamp does not really give that impression. She does say that Forum’s behavior is unacceptable and she will talk to the group leaders. A little limp; no one expects this to end the gross insults or threats. Wilders has already said he has no need for a ‘censorship conversation’. And the President of the House should not wait until after Christmas with the intention, as Bergkamp intends. You don’t see the urgency and you actually say that you don’t take the commotion too seriously.
What a wrong signal is
–
–
