In Rutte's last debate, he clashed equally forcefully with the new coalition

Outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte (VVD) sent a harsh message to the new coalition in his final debate. The PVV, VVD, NSC and BBB will soon play a leading role in appointing a new European Commissioner, but this Commissioner is not intended to defend the interests of the Netherlands or these four parties, according to Rutte. Thus, he rejected a proposal from the National Security Council and the BBC.

Because Dick Schoof's government will not be on stage until next week, Rutte will travel to Brussels again as (outgoing) Prime Minister on Thursday to attend the euro summit. He and other government leaders will be fully involved in the political ball surrounding the formation of the new European Commission. Each Member State nominates one Commissioner.

National Security Council leader Peter Umtsigt urged Rutte on Tuesday evening, in the parliamentary debate that preceded the euro summit, that the Netherlands search for a European commissioner who “broadly supports the main points of the Main Lines Agreement on European policy.” As examples, Umtsigt cited opposition to entering into common European debt and support for the agricultural policy and asylum clause of the recently concluded coalition agreement.

When asked in the debate, BBB MP Henk Vermeer said he thought it was reasonable to expect the new European Commissioner to “defend the interests of the Netherlands”.

Never instructed

Part of the future opposition was not pleased with the desire of the two new coalition parties. Henri Bontenbal (CDA) pointed out that the European Commissioner serves five years, which is longer than the term of the Council of Ministers. “Isn't it strange that the European Commissioner signs an agreement from a country, while the European Commissioner has to implement the European Commission's programme?”

Volt leader Laurens Dassen called Umtzigt's proposal “extremely unwise.” D66's Jean Pattinot was also critical of it. He asked: “Does he now want someone outside the House of Representatives to be forced to adhere to the main agreement?”

Rutte shared this criticism. “He is not the Dutch commissioner. The commissioner is the one nominated by the Netherlands,” the prime minister said. In response to Paternot’s questions, he said that the European Commission candidates nominated by his governments had not been instructed in the past to defend the cabinet or the national interest.

Umtzigt said he thought it was “not strange at all.” He said he would find it great if the Netherlands did not take its own interests into account when nominating a new candidate for commissioner. “If you look at other countries, you will find that they have much closer relations with their European Commissioner than the Netherlands. I would not like to explain this debate in France, I am telling you.”

It is expected that the Dutch European Commissioner will not be appointed after this week. This applies to a new term for the current Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen. In recent days, Rutte has held behind-the-scenes discussions about these and other top positions: not on behalf of the Netherlands, but on behalf of the liberal Renewal faction, along with French President Emmanuel Macron.

The debate over the distribution of positions was the most heated confrontation during a debate that revolved mainly around an important event: it was Rutte's last parliamentary debate. He will almost certainly become the new Secretary General of NATO soon. He concluded his answer at the end of the evening with a word of thanks to the guides and deputies.

In discussions, Rutte said, “the viewpoints should be in conflict with each other, but aim to reach a compromise while maintaining good relations.” Afterward, deputies posed alongside him for one last selfie.

To participate




Email the editor