PVV doesn't want to "bake leniency into" fraud approach
The PVV has little enthusiasm for an overly forgiving approach to fraud. MP Edgar Mulder said in response to the parliamentary inquiry into the derailed fraud policy that he does not want “parliament to immediately have to bake leniency” into legislation. “Because real fraudsters simply need to be tackled.” NSC and VVD are also unwilling to adopt the recommendations outright and have received harsh criticism from other parties for their reluctance.
The inquiry, parliament’s harshest investigation instrument, showed that the government was blind to people and justice in the benefits scandal and its fraud approach in general. The committee recommended, among other things, that laws be tested against the constitution, that more money be given to the privacy watchdog, and that the benefits system be abolished.
In the debate about the inquiry into the criticized fraud approach that caused many people to end up in financial ruin, Mulder indicated that he is in favor of good “checks and balances.” It was precisely a system that offered counterbalance that did not work well in the benefits scandal.
The largest party is reluctant to weaken the approach to fraud too much. “The PVV does not want the Netherlands to become a lazy country for criminals and profiteers,” said the MP. There are plenty of examples where the government should take harder action, he thinks. “For example, with people who apply for benefits, but in the meantime have a big car in front of their door, earn some extra money, and have a house abroad.”
The PVV MP, therefore, does not automatically embrace the recommendations of the parliamentary committee of inquiry. In the report “Blind to people and the law,” Mulder reads recommendations “that can go in any direction.” A lot depends on the implementation, he said.
SP leader Jimmy Dijk countered in the debate that the committee addressed these issues in its recommendations. “That is refuted in the recommendations themselves. You are looking for reasons not to adopt the recommendations. I think that is a shame.”
Many parties looked to the PVV in the debate. The largest party in parliament, currently the PVV, normally gets the initiative to come up with a proposal with which the Tweede Kamer expresses its support for an inquiry report. But according to Mulder, that’s a strange expectation. “I did not cause the misery,” the PVV parliamentarian said. The government did, he said. “We must hold them to account. You do this by submitting a motion, parliament-wide, asking for a response from the Cabinet.”
Asked by DENK, the PVV parliamentarian said he was still “in favor” of recording someone’s (second) nationality. If people of a certain nationality commit a relatively large amount of fraud, “then that may well be an indicator,” he said. “There’s nothing wrong or racist or weird about that.”
Other parties in the Tweede Kamer, the lower house of the Dutch parliament, were very critical of the PVV, VVD, and NSC’s reluctance to accept the chastisement and recommendations from the parliamentary committee of inquiry. “The committee rightly says: it would be inexcusable if no lessons are learned from the report,” said MP Luc Stultiens of GroenLinks-PvdA.
SP leader Dijk said that parties that do not want to accept the recommendations without a fight better have a “very extensive” explanation. DENK leader Stephan van Baarle accused the NSC of pandering to the PVV because Pieter Omtzigt’s party wanted to wait for the PVV proposal.
The NSC wants to arrive at “a broadly supported motion,” NSC MP Nicolien van Vroonhoven said. According to the MP, exposing the benefits scandal is pretty much the new party’s reason for existence. NSC is, therefore, “solid as a rock” for the recommendations. However, she would prefer to “get the entire Kamer on the same page.” Only that can bring about a real cultural change, Van Vroonhoven said.
VVD parliamentarian Roelien Kamminga called the suggestion that only parties that embrace the recommendations one-on-one take the report seriously a “caricature.” According to her, the report on the derailed fraud policy emphasizes the importance of caution. “We are not doing justice to the report if we say: screw it.” The VVD also finds the specific interpretation of many recommendations important.
Reporting by ANP and NL Times