Tumult in the House: Corona debate suspended for FvD entry | the interior

Tumult in the House: Corona debate suspended for FvD entry |  the interior

Bergkamp said such a call for non-compliance with the statutes runs counter to House rules when discussing the rules of procedure. When Van Meijeren wanted to explain what he meant by the call, Bergkamp turned off his microphone and postponed the meeting. “I don’t want to discuss this.”

Watch the live broadcast:

The cause of the unrest was Van Meijeren’s statements to “disclose, prosecute and detain those responsible for Corona policy”. GL MP Lisa Westerfield wondered how exactly he envisioned that.

After the FvD’s speech, in which he spoke of “criminal policy” and called for “civil disobedience”, the Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies intervened: If Van Meijeren did not intend to report an official crime, he should discuss the issue • Prosecution of politicians before the courts for final rest. Van Meeren said that such a report is pointless, because he does not trust the police and the judiciary.

More flexible

After the comment, a heated debate arose between the deputies. MP Fleur Agema disagrees with PVV, but believes he should be able to say what he wants. “Today it is he who is not allowed to express his opposition, tomorrow it will be me.” Ajima tried to calm VVD Representative Judith Tellin outside the microphone. “We have to be more flexible. He is on seven seats.”

“They increased two seats today,” muttered Webern van Haga, who left FvD earlier due to his dissatisfaction with the course. Wieke Paulusma discussed with Nicki Pouw: “It crosses the line for me, that’s what his supporters want. I also see videos of him, unfortunately, calling for civil disobedience.”

pool of water

In all the excitement, Caroline van der Plas knocked a glass of water on the desk of the chair with her elbow. Ajima tried to drain the urine with a sheet of paper.

After Van Meijeren was allowed to continue his speech, he said of Minister Ernst Kuipers that his job was to “lick up and kick down”. Bergkamp thinks that is “too personal” and “tasteless”.


With her intervention, Bergkamp is doing what she had failed to do in the eyes of MPs in previous days. She received a lot of criticism when she allowed Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders to go his way and accused people who could not defend themselves in Parliament.

When the debate resumed, Bergkamp explained that the rules of order in the House state that the president can intervene if he “incites MPs to unlawful acts,” if they show disrespect and their behavior “detracts from the dignity of the House.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back To Top