I've been watching NL1/2/3 a couple of hours today so I heard most of it. Van der Laan's arguments are a bit weak in my opinion. The whole Verdonk affaire has been a bit odd, but they agreed on certain things and Verdonk was actually doing what the goverment asked her to do. Yet it is still not good enough for D66. (Or atleast some of em.)
Also very weird that the fraction (dunnow the english word for it sorry
) and the ministers had a different opinion about this matter. Seems like people in D66 don't comunicate with eachother very well, allthough Van der Laan said otherwise.
Rutte was overacting a bit (too suprised IMO) but he had some fair points. I agreed with most of what he said.
Well if I understood everything well, there is a big chance that the CDA and VVD will go on without D66. Maybe that's the best idea since 2007 will be a waste if there will be new elections. (Atleast, every single politician said so) We'll sure find out I guess.
Anyway, D66 is getting blamed for all this, while they tend to say that the CDA and the VVD find it more important to back up Verdonk rather than caring about the progress of Holland as a country.
I find it hard to chose a side, but I think Van de Laan's story is a bit flawed, where as Rutten's story seems to be right.
Personally I'm not glad they resigned, because the oppositian has it real easy, and have been trying their best to stir up the Verdonk case so the goverment would resign or Verdonk would leave.
Oo
