De WaterExpert
← Archive
The WaterExpert · Archive · Policy, industry & figures

How independent is the Mulier Institute when it comes to swimming safety?

By Shiva de Winter · April 14, 2022

Originally published on LinkedIn on April 14, 2022 · by Shiva de Winter, The WaterExpert.

Parliament bases its knowledge and understanding of swimming safety on the findings of “independent” research carried out by the Mulier Institute. But just how independent is this institute, and how entangled are the interests of those who sit on its boards?

The Mulier Institute conducts commissioned research on a wide range of topics. On several occasions it has turned its attention to the aquatics sector and swimming safety. One example is the financial impact of Covid-19 on the swimming pool industry. Initially, the government relied on the Mulier Institute’s calculations. That study was commissioned by the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport (VWS). At the insistence of the Association of Sport and Municipalities (VSG) and the National Council for Swimming Safety (NRZ), it was limited to municipal swimming pools and municipal property. Yet in many cases these municipal pools were actually operated by commercial and publicly listed parties.

The calculations came up with an estimated figure of around 180 million euros in damages for the first period. This became the basis for the support package known as the Specific Payment for Ice Rinks and Swimming Pools (SPUKIJZ). The 180 million was nowhere near enough for a sector that also included a great many commercial parties. Commercial pools were not allowed to draw on it. The VSG pointed those affected towards the existing support packages under the small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) heading. For commercial pools, these packages fell far short. For public pools, it was extra financial support on top of the subsidies they were already receiving.

Now to the NRZ; via the Chamber of Commerce, a whole world of information opens up. There you can see board members who are not listed on the website, and you find several cases of “wearing two hats.” Today the spotlight falls on the chairman of the NRZ: Johannes (Jan) Rijpstra. Mr Rijpstra’s main role is Mayor of the Municipality of Smallingerland. The Municipality of Smallingerland covers a number of towns, including Drachten.

The Municipality of Smallingerland has been busy for quite some time preparing and carrying out the construction of a new swimming pool. Zwemcentrum de Welle is set to become a green, sustainable centre, with the goal—together with the Royal Dutch Swimming Federation (KNZB)—of serving as a top-level sport and talent development venue in the north of the country. For this project, the province has made an extra subsidy of 10 million euros available. Total costs are estimated at well over 20 million euros. It’s striking, to say the least, that in most large towns the purse strings are pulled tight when it comes to building swimming pools, while here every possible resource is being pulled out of the drawer.

Might the Mayor’s side role have something to do with it? What is certainly notable is that two KNZB board members also sit on the NRZ board. Short lines of communication are all too easy to draw here.

Then there is Jan Rijpstra’s other role; besides being chairman of the National Council for Swimming Safety, he is also a member of the Supervisory Board of the Mulier Institute. And that just happens to be the very agency that carries out all sorts of research for the Ministry of VWS—where the big decisions are made! If you analyse the recent corona period, it was mainly the large federations and interest groups (subsidised by the Ministry of VWS, under the leadership of the VSG) that dropped the ball when it came to real swimming safety. Big words, plenty of Zoom meetings in secondary talking shops, but the decisions were made behind the desk.

The Netherlands’ swimming safety is now largely determined by people who, as I pointed out, seem to have interests other than those the federations and interest groups were actually meant to serve. Isn’t it time for The Hague to open its eyes and lend a listening ear to those on the ground themselves? Swimming safety belongs to all of us and is there for all of us, and we will all have to do our bit. To achieve that, a few sacred cows will have to be slaughtered. I would start with the chairman.

More from — Policy, industry & figures

All articles in this theme →

View the in-depth expert articles in the knowledge base →

← Back to the archive