The House of Representatives will vote on Thursday about the asylum laws that are part of “the strictest asylum policy ever”. The much -discussed laws already took a bumpy road before they ended up in the room, and that road became even bumpy last week.
They must be part of “the strictest asylum policy ever”: the so -called asylum measures law and the two -state system. Put on paper by the now left asylum minister Marjolein Faber and defended in the Lower House last week by two of her three successors.
After the fall of the cabinet, the much -discussed laws ended up in an uncertain phase. Because did all former coalition parties still support the plans? VVD, NSC and BBB do.
PVV still wants a stricter asylum policy. But during the debate last week, the party did not agree with the laws if they were even relaxed.
The laws in short
A lot to do the laws
There was a lot to do to the laws before they came to the room. For example, the Council of State and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (IND) expressed great concern about the feasibility of the plans.
Involved organizations and several MPs also complained about Faber’s approach. Little time and contact were possible with the then minister. Faber himself indicated that he would not want to change anything about her laws.
Several MPs themselves did come up with many adjustments: dozens of so -called amendments were submitted. The room voted over that on Tuesday.
Change plans are decisive
That mood was looked forward to with interest. Because the laws were refined based on those amendments. And the result would be decisive for achieving a majority. In addition to the response of the PVV, that of the CDA was especially important.
After all, that party was looked at for achieving a majority in the Senate. The former coalition parties have no majority there.
Whereas the PVV did not want any milder laws, the CDA did want that at one point: the two -state system should be introduced simultaneously with the new European migration rules. After all, that was also the intimate wish of the IND.
PVV amendment makes a result uncertain
The CDA did not receive a majority for the amendment in which that delay was requested. The PVV, on the other hand, unexpectedly received a majority for one of its amendment proposals with which the laws become even stricter. This involved criminalizing illegality and assistance to illegal immigrants.
That happened when a few parliamentary members of the opposition were absent in connection with Ketikoti. Normally agreements are made with other MPs so that the relationships remain the same. But that went wrong that day, and so the mood turned out cheaply for the proponents of the PVV amendment.
As a result, the political playing cards were again shaken. PVV leader Geert Wilders announced that he would still agree with the laws of his former minister.
At the same time, former coalition fellow NSC is still considering the amendment about the asylum measurement measures law. The party is against criminalizing illegality. This means that a majority in the Lower House is not yet certain for at least the asylum measures law.
Majority in the Senate anyway complicated
If the House of Representatives agree, it will also be complicated to get the laws through the Senate. The PVV amendment is a reason for CDA leader Henri Bontenbal to vote against the Asylum Measures Act. In addition, the objections of the CDA against the two -status system remained too large. In the video below, Bontenbal explains his decision.
The former coalition parties must therefore receive all right-wing opposition parties and several middle parties to get a majority for their laws.
So there are still many bumps in the way of being able to take the first steps for the strictest asylum policy ever before the elections. On Thursday it must be clear whether the laws will take the bump in the Lower House successfully.
The house of representatives will vote on thursday on the asylum laws that are part of “the strictest asylum policy ever”. The much-discussed laws have already had a bumpy ride before they ended up in the house, and that road Became even bumpier last week.
They must be part of “the strictest asylum policy ever”: the so-called asylum emergency measures law and the two-status system. Put on paper by the now Departed Asylum Minister Marjolein Faber and defended Last Week in the House of Representatives by Two of Her Three Successors.
After the fall of the cabinet, the much discussed laws have ended up in an uncertain phase. Because all the former coalition parties still support the plans? VVD, NSC and BBB Did.
PVV also Still Wants a Stricter Asylum Policy. But the party indicated duration the debate last week that would not agree to the laws if they were just slightly relaxed.
The laws in letter
Much to do about the laws
There was Already Much to do about the laws before they come to the house. For Example, The Council of State and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (IND) Expressed Major Conerns About The Feasibility of the Plans.
Involved organizations and Several Members of Parliament also complained about Faber’s approach. There was little time and contact Possible with the then minister. Faber herself indicated that she did not want to change anything about her laws.
Several Members of Parliament Themselves Did Come Up With Many Amendments: Boxes of SO-Called Amendments Were Submitted. The house voted on these on Tuesday.
Amendment Plans Are Decisive
The Vote was Eagly Awaited. Because the laws were refined on the basis of those amendments. And the result of that would be decisive for achieving a majority. In Addition to the Reaction of the PVV, That of the CDA, particularly was important.
After all, that party was being looked to for achieving a majority in the senate. The Old Coalition Parties do not have a majority there.
Where the PVV Absolutely Did Not Want Milder Laws, The CDA Did Want That One Point: The Two-Status System Should Be Introduced SimultaneUously With the New European Migration Rules. After all, that was also the Ardent Wish of the Ind.
PVV Amendment Makes Outcome Uncertain
The cda did not get a majority for the amendment request that postponement. The PVV, on the other hand, unexpectedly got a majority for one of its amendments, which makes the laws just as stricter. This is concerned making illegal stay and assistance to illegal immigrants Punishable.
That happened when some members of parliament from the opposition were absent due to ketikoti. Normally, Agreements are made with other members of parliament so that the relationships remain the same. But that is wrong that day, and so the vote turned out favorable for the supporters of the PVV amendment.
As a result, the political cards were reshuffled. PVV Leader Geert Wilders Announced that he would still agree to the laws of his Former Minister.
At the same time, Former Coalition Partner NSC is Still Considering The Asylum Emergency Measures Law Due to That Amendment. The Party is Against Making Illegal Stay Punishable. This mean that a majority in the house of representatives for at least the asylum emergency measures law is not yet certain.
Majority in senate complicated anyway
If the house of representatives agrees, it will also be difficult to get the laws through the senate. The PVV Amendment is for CDA Leader Henri Bontenbal, A Reason to Vote Against The Asylum Emergency Measures Law. In Addition, The Cda’s Objections to the Two-Status System Remained Too Great. In The Video Below, Bontenbal Explains His Decision.
The Old Coalition Parties Must Therefore Get All The Right-Wing Opposition Parties and Several Center Parties to Get a Majority for Their Laws.
So There Are Still Many Obstacles in the way to take the first steps for the strictest asylum policy ever before the elections. Thursday Will Show Whether the Laws Will Successful Overcome the Hurdle in the House of Representatives.