Home » Business » Arib: commotion about roll-call vote not good for parliament

Arib: commotion about roll-call vote not good for parliament

Due to the corona crisis, salaries in healthcare are a very sensitive subject in political The Hague. The motion was voted on with a ‘show of hands’: all members of the governing parties present voted against and the entire opposition in favor.

In the words of Arib, this meant that the result could not be determined: the government parties together have 75 seats and the opposition also 75. Wilders therefore asked for a roll-call vote during the debate: all MPs must then say whether they are for or against.

Only eight more coalition MPs

But after a short suspension, it turned out that there were not enough MPs present for a valid roll-call vote: there was insufficient “quorum”: for a roll-call vote there must be at least 76 members, but there were only 63 (at the beginning of the meeting 96) Only eight members of parliament of the government parties were present.

The opposition parties reacted furiously, accusing the coalition MPs of running away on purpose. The government parties later pointed out that during the corona crisis, the House agreed that a roll-call vote must be announced in advance, and that “another moment” would be sought for that vote. Due to corona, roll-call votes now take place in groups of fifty MPs. When fifty people have voted, the meeting is always suspended to allow everyone to leave the room.

Explain dilemma

It is widely said that the MPs could have known that Wilders would request a roll-call vote. Arib points out that the House itself decides when something is to be voted on and that it does not have the power to decide. And if MPs think that a roll-call vote cannot be taken because of the corona rules, they can justify this in the House, she adds.

Meanwhile, the government parties D66 and CU acknowledge that yesterday they should have explained better why they did not want to vote immediately. D66 party chairman Jetten says on Facebook that he should have expressed his dilemma more clearly: whether the House to keep the corona agreements or “suspend hours to let people come back from all over the country in the middle of the night”. Jetten admits that he cooperated in not making the quorum.

The ChristenUnie comes with a similar response. That party also thinks that the dilemma should have been better explained: “It is clear that the agreement made this spring (about a roll-call vote during corona) no longer works.”

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.