Senate declares expansion bill non-controversial

The Senate will discuss the distribution bill. A section of the Senate wanted the proposal to be declared “moot”, meaning that the Senate would not debate the proposal until a new Cabinet was formed. However, in the roll call, 54 senators voted against and 21 senators voted in favor. The votes to postpone came from VVD, PVV, SGP, FvD and JA21. As it emerged this evening, the bill will no longer be discussed before the Parliamentary elections.

The BBB (the largest group in the Senate, with 16 seats) is highly critical of the legislation and will almost certainly vote against it, but wanted citizens and communities to have clarity before the House elections. This proved impossible for procedural reasons and so the BBB withdrew the recommendation that treatment be carried out before the election. Group leader Lagas believes that “the Netherlands is ready to respond” and that decisions must be made. This will now happen after the elections. It remains to be seen whether the bill will ultimately pass the Senate; It certainly looks exciting.

The House of Representatives debated the bill in plenary even as the Cabinet was leaving. It was approved on October 10 with 81 votes in favor and 66 against. Dissenting voices included VVD, the party of outgoing Foreign Minister Van der Burg, who temporarily replaced his colleague Van der Maat due to illness.

Municipalities may have difficulty

The essence of the law is that, in extreme cases, municipalities can be forced to cooperate in the reception of asylum seekers in order to distribute them more evenly across the country. There has been and is a lot of discussion about the law. Opponents say it affects local autonomy.

During the vote in the House of Representatives, the SP’s amendment proposal stating that the financial situation of a municipality will play a role in the distribution of refugees throughout the country was also accepted. As a result, the SP passed the law and ultimately gained a majority in the House of Representatives.

Source: NOS

follow:
\