Today, Minister Sigrid Kaag of Finance will provide an explanation about the extra 40 billion euros that will be spent in 2022, half of which will be without permission from the House. The latter in particular leads to annoyance in parliament, according to political reporter Mats Akkerman.
The largest part of that 40 billion came from the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Akkerman knows. This is partly due to the energy ceiling for households and the allowance for energy-intensive SMEs. ‘But more than 20 billion was spent without the approval of the House,’ Akkerman points out. “Normally, if extra money needs to be spent, you can adjust the budget.”
‘You can spend money without the House, but then you violate the right to budget. And that is only allowed in a crisis’
Such an adjustment is also referred to as an incidental supplementary budget, which is always followed by a debate, according to Akkerman. ‘But you can also spend money without the House. Then you violate the budget right of the House, and that is only allowed in a crisis.’
No crisis
And that is precisely the essential element that is missing, according to SP Member of Parliament Mahir Alkaya. Although he did see the pandemic as a crisis situation, he believes that the cabinet has ‘been in a permanent crisis ever since, in which leniency has been counted on for too long’. ‘And that is why he thinks that money should not be spent in a crisis way,’ explains Akkerman.
According to editor-in-chief Jasper Lukkezen of economist magazine ESB, it is right that the House expresses its concern about the unauthorized expenditure of such amounts. ’20 billion is simply two to three percent of our GDP, and that is four to five percent of the national budget,’ says Lukkezen. ‘So I understand that the House is concerned about it.’
Principles
He also thinks that it is also a point of principle for parliament. All the more so because the participation of the House of Representatives is essential for good governance. ‘The vast majority of those 20 billion are probably expenditures that the Chamber would have approved if they had been asked,’ he explains.
And that is exactly what the debate is about today, thinks Lukkezen. He emphasizes that there are subjects where it is better to spend money immediately than to wait too long for the approval of parliament. ‘It is now relatively easy for the minister to spend money without consulting parliament,’ he explains. ‘A letter must be sent to the House explaining that there is an urgency, and then it is up to the House to find something about it afterwards. And parties – including the VVD – are ultimately not very happy about that.’
