It was the second time in a short period that Eindhoven Alderperson Mieke Verhees faced a motion of no confidence. This time, during an emergency debate in which eight opposition parties called her to account for tinkering with the 85 per cent affordability standard in the new housing programme.
It was another heated debate for Alderperson Mieke Verhees (PvdA, labour party), who received fierce criticism from the Eindhoven opposition. “I’m really shocked”, she said afterwards when asked.
The eight parties, led by Ritmeester Fractie, believe the Alderperson hasn’t been open enough about the new housing programme for the city and that the 85 per cent affordability standard for housing projects is being tampered with, contrary to agreements. “If we allow fundamental agreements to change overnight, that’s the definition of erratic policy. Then we can’t have any trust”, lead petitioner, Tjeerd Ritmeester says.
Theatrics
“I really don’t understand what trust I’ve violated”, Verhees said. “There were already a few exceptions, and now there are more”. According to her, this doesn’t constitute a change of course, and the ambition to build 85 per cent affordably across the city remains intact. However, additional exceptions have been included in the programme for high-rise buildings. According to D66 party leader Chris Dams, Tuesday evening’s debate is a “major political theatrical performance” because: “We’ll be discussing the content of the programme in about six weeks”.
Opposition party VVD, always fiercely opposed to this affordability standard, was not a co-requester of the emergency debate, but did submit the motion of censure after the Alderperson’s response. Party leader Lex Janssen considered her not “politically sensitive enough on a sensitive issue”.
A political mortal sin
Moreover, Janssen believes the Alderperson had committed a “mortal political sin”. She had first shared the document with coalition parties, as PvdA council member Rosa van den Nieuwenhof hinted. “To gauge their reaction in advance”, Verhees said. All four coalition partners (D66, CDA, GroenLinks and PvdA) apologised for what they considered a “unique situation”. “That shouldn’t have happened”, Dams (D66) said.
The opposition felt the Alderperson lacked sufficient reflection and therefore submitted a motion of censure. The motion ultimately failed, as the coalition parties continued to support it. Nevertheless, trust between the City Council and the executive board remains strained now that a motion of censure has been tabled for the second time in three weeks
Note by editor: until quite recently, Theerd Rotmeester was a member of PvdA, Verhees’ party.
Source: Studio040/Merijn van Merrienboer
Translated by: Bob
