HS analysis|The Rkp MP has repeatedly voted against the government’s line. In the background discussions, it is understood that Biaudet has been granted a different freedom to act like this in some cases.
Rkp’s Congressman Eva Biaudet has regularly voted against the government’s line in votes related to immigration crackdowns.
Both this week and last week, Biaudet opposed the government’s proposals in the plenary session, which, among other things, reduce the subsidies received by those seeking international protection and enable the duration of the asylum application procedure to be shortened from six months to four weeks.
Both bills received a majority in the plenary session despite Biaudet’s voting decisions.
Traditionally MPs from the ruling party are expected to vote according to the government’s line. The exception is the so-called “questions of conscience”, in connection with which the governing parties have agreed on free voting behavior in advance.
If, in any other vote, a member of parliament from the ruling party votes against the government’s line, the result will at least be an interview by their own parliamentary group or, at worst, dismissal from the group or a government crisis.
However, Biaudet’s slips in the immigration votes have been reacted with shrugs not only in the Rkp but also in other government parties.
Minister of Economic Affairs by Wille Rydman (ps) after the vote of confidence, there was another voice on the clock. Chairman of the parliamentary group of fundamental Finns Jani Mäkelä publicly demanded an explanation from Rkp as to why Biaudet voted against Rydman’s vote of confidence.
Chairman of Rkp’s parliamentary group Otto Andersson answered this publicly that there are no consequences for Biaudet. Member of Parliament on the side of the coalition Pihla Keto-Huovinen had to be interviewed for abstaining.
Rkp and Perussuomalaiset seem to interpret the situation in opposite ways. According to the basic Finns’ point of view, everything that has not been separately agreed upon in the government negotiations will be voted on in accordance with the common line. According to the Rkp’s view, there is no need to form a common line on issues that have not been agreed upon in the government negotiations.
Of these, the interpretation of basic Finns is closer to how government cooperation has traditionally worked in Finland. The next time, the difference in interpretation will come up in the votes of the so-called “conversion law”. Rkp has decided to give its MPs a free hand.
Above described still does not explain the silence around Biaudet’s immigration votes.
In the background discussions, it has been given to understand that Biaudet would already have been given a special permission during the government negotiations not to vote in line with the government’s line, at least on immigration extortion. At Säätytalo, the Christian Democrats were granted a similar exemption for alcohol votes.
Biaudet himself does not want to assess what has been agreed upon by the leadership of the governing parties or these parliamentary groups regarding his voting.
Rkp’s Andersson, who leads the parliamentary group of fundamental Finns, did not want to comment on the topic publicly Jani Mäkelä or sitting at the head of the party Riikka Purra or the Prime Minister Petteri Orpo (cook). Rkp’s new chairman Anders Adlercreutz on the other hand, denied to HS that Biaudet had been granted a dispensation.
The question arises as to why one does not want to admit something that is so obvious from the voting behavior out loud.
#Analysis #strange #silence #surrounds #voting #behavior #Rkps #Eva #Biaudet
