Chamber in Debate very critical about Bruins reform plans for public broadcaster

Minister Eppo Bruins and kind createsHunger Games In Hilversum « ? Is his plan to reform the broadcasters on a » eppogeddon « ? The House of Representatives was very critical of Bruins (Media, NSC) on Monday to reform the public broadcaster – without completely shooting that plan.

From 2029, the minister wants to accommodate twelve public broadcasters in at most five ‘broadcasters’. He only wants to keep the NOS as a separate broadcaster. Task broadcaster NTR he wants to cancel. Bruins believes that reform is necessary because the public broadcaster otherwise loses its relevance: « If we do not make a major choices, consumers will do it. » Apart from this, the annual budget of the public broadcaster will go down considerably from 2027, from 807 million to 649 million euros – the biggest austerity ever.

Especially his plan to lift the NTR met with a lot of protest. Prior to the parliamentary debate, dozens of NTR employees came to parliament in The Hague with banners to offer Bruins a petition for preserving the broadcaster. At the start of the debate it turned out that a spacious room -wide majority for preserving the NTR is. As far as the room is concerned, the NTR comes together in one broadcaster with the NOS. As it was before 1995.

Bruins wasted the motion on this, but was less firmly in the debate about the end of the NTR than in the letter to parliament about his reform plan. He continued to turn around it until the end of the debate. The task of the NTR is to offer education and youth television and to serve target groups – such as minorities – that are not discussed with the other broadcasters. According to Bruins, the new broadcasting houses will now get those tasks and the NTR as a broom wagon is therefore undesirable. « I do not want to install a safety net in advance for sounds that are not going to be heard. Then the broadcaster would evade their responsibility and we will remain in the old system too much. »

Motions

The room saw many contradictions and open ends in the plans. Bruins was not concrete enough. Member of Parliament Jan Paternotte (D66) had never seen so many spits in a letter to parliament.  » He foresaw a circus with a recasting and profiling because the minister does not make choices himself.  » The latter was already apparent from the high number of 33 motions that was submitted. Again it was remarkable that the coalition parties were about as critical of their own minister as the opposition.

Member of Parliament Martine van der Velde of the PVV, the largest government party, called Bruins’s plan « a utopia. » Moreover, the reform would be « tinkering on the outside » that does not solve the core problems. She believes that the NPO is political one -sided and has no democratic identification. She suggested introducing the « Czech model » in which the public broadcaster is paid from Kijk- and Luistergeld, rather than from state aid and advertising.

Bruins’ plan to lock the broadcaster – nobody is allowed to recover or leave – also encountered resistance. How could new sounds from society arrive? According to Bruins, the future broadcaster houses will automatically bring in new sounds. The fact that the minister wants to make the broadcasting associations, with their 2.4 million members (count 2021), subordinate to Omroephuizen, also led to criticism. Harmen Krul (CDA): « As if an association is something old -fashioned. The broadcasting associations are the connecting link between society and media. »

Member of Parliament Claire Martens-America (VVD), on whose own reform plan Bruins was largely based, was positive afterwards. According to her, the plan stands up firmly. According to her, the criticism from the Chamber mainly applied details. Martens also regretted that the minister left so much in the middle.

Bruins promised to come up with an additional parliamentary letter. The House of Representatives will vote on the reform plans on April 22.

To share

Mail the editors