Critical questions and sharp answers during former education minister Van Engelshoven's COVID hearing

Former Dutch Education Minister Ingrid van Engelshoven faced intense scrutiny during a parliamentary inquiry into the government's COVID-19 response, particularly regarding the prolonged closure of educational institutions.

“

And I felt very supported in that by the cabinet.

Van Engelshoven, representing the D66 party, asserted that as minister, she consistently advocated for keeping education open or reopening it as much as possible. She stated she felt well-supported by the cabinet in these efforts. However, the inquiry committee members presented a different perspective, highlighting the significant impact of school closures on children, including learning deficits and mental health problems. Basic and secondary education in the Netherlands experienced two lengthy closures during the pandemic, with periods of limited operation, such as half-day classes. University students were largely confined to remote learning for nearly two years, leading to widespread loneliness and mental health challenges.

The committee members questioned Van Engelshoven about the rationale behind the school closures, especially the second prolonged closure in December 2020. She struggled at times to recall specific reasons, admitting her memory was faltering on certain details. She contested the notion that closures were solely to keep parents at home, referencing Prime Minister Mark Rutte's past remarks. Van Engelshoven maintained that the government's strategy involved combating the virus while simultaneously "keeping the interests of young people in mind." She acknowledged that school closures were sometimes necessary, stating, "sometimes it just couldn't be helped."

“

it was not the case that the interests of young people did not count

During the questioning, committee members Annelotte Lammers (Groep Markuszower) and André Poortman (CDA) pressed Van Engelshoven on the decisions leading to school closures. Her responses were often described as sharp, and she occasionally cited memory lapses. She explained her role as a minister involved daily consultations with educational stakeholders to discuss the "feasibility" of COVID-19 measures. Van Engelshoven characterized her approach as being a good listener to the sector while simultaneously explaining and defending cabinet decisions and ensuring their implementation.

“

You have to listen carefully to the sector. And at the same time, you have the responsibility to explain and defend [a cabinet decision] as well as possible and ensure that sectors implement it.

Van Engelshoven conceded that the "social aspect" of education was important for students, but argued that restrictive measures were necessary to combat the virus. She explained that preventing students from gathering or traveling was a key consideration. The inquiry aimed to understand the balance struck between public health measures and the well-being of young people during the pandemic.

“

sometimes it just couldn't be helped