plenum van 2022-03-30 14:20:00+00:00 in Chamber of representatives

General information

Full name: plenum van 2022-03-30 14:20:00+00:00 in Chamber of representatives
Type: plenum
URL: https://www.dekamer.be/doc/PCRI/html/55/ip172x.html
Parliament: Chamber of representatives

You are currently viewing the advanced reviewing page for this source file. You'll note that the layout of the website is less user-friendly than the rest of Demobel. This is on purpose, because it allows people to voluntarily review and correct the translations of the source files. Its goal is not to convey information, but to validate it. If that's not your goal, I'd recommend you to click on one of the propositions that you can find in the table below. But otherwise, feel free to roam around!

Propositions that were discussed

Code	Date	Adopted	Title
55K2547	09/03/2022	✔	Projet de loi abrogeant la loi du 16 mai 1938 portant réglementation de la durée du travail dans l'industrie diamantaire, modifiant le Code pénal social et abrogeant deux arrêtés relatifs au registre de présence dans l'industrie diamantaire.
55K2529	01/03/2022	✔	Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 10 mai 2015 coordonnée relative à l'exercice des professions des soins de santé.
55K2494	09/02/2022	✔	Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 16 novembre 2015 portant des dispositions diverses en matière sociale.
55K2379	09/12/2021	✔	Projet de loi portant exécution du règlement (UE) 2017/821 du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 17 mai 2017 fixant des obligations liées au devoir de diligence à l'égard de la chaîne d'approvisionnement pour les importateurs de l'Union qui importent de l'étain, du tantale et du tungstène, leurs minerais et de l'or provenant de zones de conflit ou à haut risque.
55K2377	09/12/2021	✔	Projet de loi transposant la Directive (UE) 2019/789 du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 17 avril 2019 établissant des règles sur l'exercice du droit d'auteur et des droits voisins applicables à certaines transmissions en ligne d'organismes de radiodiffusion et retransmissions de programmes de télévision et de radio, et modifiant la directive 93/83/CEE du Conseil.
55K1985	19/05/2021	✔	Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 18 juillet 1991 organique du contrôle des services de police et de renseignement et de l'Organe de coordination pour l'analyse de la menace en ce qui concerne l'obligation, pour le Service d'Enquêtes du Comité P, d'informer l'autorité disciplinaire compétente de l'existence d'une faute disciplinaire éventuelle lorsqu'il agit dans le cadre d'une enquête pénale.
55K0591	15/10/2019	✘	Proposition de loi relative à l'ouverture du parc du Château de Laeken au public.
55K2447	25/01/2022	✔	Projet de loi modifiant la section 2/1 du Code pénal social concernant les pouvoirs spécifiques des inspecteurs sociaux en matière de constatations relatives à la discrimination.

Discussions

You are currently viewing the English version of Demobel. This means that you will only be able to review and correct the English translations next to the official text. If you want to review translations in another language, then choose your preferred language in the footer.

Discussions statuses

ID	German	French	English	Esperanto	Spanish	Dutch
#0	⚙	⚙	⚙	⚙	⚙	★
#1	⚙	⚙	⚙	⚙	⚙	★
#2	⚙	★	⚙	⚙	⚙	⚙
#3	⚙	⚙	⚙	⚙	⚙	★
#4	⚙	★	⚙	⚙	⚙	⚙
#5	⚙	⚙	⚙	⚙	⚙	★
#6	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#7	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#8	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#9	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#10	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#11	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#12	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#13	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#14	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#15	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#16	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#17	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#18	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#19	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#20	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#21	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#22	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#23	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#24	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#25	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#26	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#27	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#28	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#29	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#30	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#31	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#32	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#33	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#34	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#35	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#36	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#37	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#38	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#39	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#40	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#41	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#42	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#43	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#44	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#45	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#46	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#47	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#48	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#49	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#50	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#51	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#52	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#53	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#54	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#55	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#56	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#57	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#58	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#59	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#60	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#61	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#62	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#63	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#64	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#65	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#66	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#67	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#68	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#69	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#70	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#71	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#72	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#73	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#74	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#75	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#76	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#77	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#78	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#79	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#80	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#81	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#82	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#83	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#84	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#85	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#86	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#87	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#88	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#89	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#90	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#91	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#92	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#93	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#94	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#95	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#96	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#97	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#98	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#99	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#100	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#101	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#102	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#103	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#104	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#105	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#106	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#107	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#108	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★

#0

#1

Official text

                    
                    Collega's, op 15 maart heeft deze meerderheid ons wetsvoorstel ter zake weggestemd, zonder enige verantwoording, zonder enig argument of enige duiding.

Ik kan dat maar moeilijk geloven. Op een paar uitzonderingen na is iedereen voorstander van ons wetsvoorstel. Ik ga er dus van uit dat er een vergissing in het spel is. Daarom bied ik deze plenaire vergadering – morgen wordt er gestemd – de mogelijkheid op een herkansing, namelijk om dit wetsvoorstel toch aan te nemen en niet akkoord te gaan met de conclusies van de commissie voor Binnenlandse Zaken.

Collega's, u kent allemaal het park van Laken. Dat is enorm groot, ongeveer 186 hectare, vergelijkbaar met een gemiddelde Vlaamse centrumstad of bijvoorbeeld het centrum van Sint-Niklaas. Die grote groene long is nu afgesloten voor de bevolking. Dat is een spijtige zaak, zeker als men weet dat het vlak bij de dichtbevolkte kanaalzone ligt. Daar wonen veel mensen zonder tuin die op zoek zijn naar groene ontspannings- en recreatiemogelijkheden. De hekken van het park blijven echter gesloten. Ons wetsvoorstel zou daarom een fantastische opportuniteit zijn.

Het wettelijke kader omtrent het park is onduidelijk en voor interpretatie vatbaar. Kan het opengesteld worden of niet? Wie moet daarover beslissen? Wie moet er beslissen over de eigendomsstructuur? We wilden met dit wetsvoorstel duidelijkheid scheppen zodat er praktische schikkingen kunnen worden getroffen.

Het domein bestaat uit twee zones. De eerste is eigendom van de Regie der Gebouwen, het betreft het kasteel zelf en de aanhorigheden daarrond. De andere percelen waren in het verleden de persoonlijke eigendom van Leopold II. Ze zijn in de schenkingsakte van 1900 overgeheveld naar de Belgische Staat. Dat is later verankerd in de schenkingswet van 1903.

In tegenstelling tot een aantal andere domeinen is er in de specifieke bepaling voor het park van Laken geen bepaling opgenomen die zegt dat de troonopvolgers mede het genot zouden kunnen hebben van die eigendom. Bijgevolg is onze interpretatie dat dit domein eigenlijk opengesteld zou kunnen worden voor de bevolking. Daar worden we dus geconfronteerd met een interpretatie die wij wensen op te helderen.

Collega's, ons wetsvoorstel is pragmatisch ten aanzien van de koninklijke familie. Het is een wetsvoorstel waarvan wij dachten dat er een draagvlak voor zou kunnen bestaan. Het gebruik van het kasteel en de aanhorigheden is voor de koninklijke familie. De andere percelen zouden kunnen worden opengesteld voor de bevolking. Op dat voorstel werd dus niet ingegaan. Dit wetsvoorstel werd jammer genoeg verworpen.

Dat vind ik toch een rare zaak. De Brusselse regering gaat ermee akkoord. In Brussel is er een meerderheid om het voorstel in voege te kunnen laten treden. In dit parlement zijn alle partijen – op de MR na, als ik me niet vergis – er voorstander van om de parktuinen van Laken open te stellen. Dan is het toch verwonderlijk dat dit wetsvoorstel hier weggestemd werd.

Deze vivaldicoalitie heeft de mond vol van politieke vernieuwing, van openstaan voor argumenten, van naar elkaar luisteren, van tegenargumenten geven enzovoort. Als ik dan moet vaststellen dat ons wetsvoorstel zonder enige argumentatie of enig element van weerlegging wordt weggestemd in de commissie, dan vind ik dat een spijtige zaak. Ik kan dan niet anders dan vaststellen dat de politieke vernieuwing een lege doos is.

Mevrouw de voorzitter, ik hoop dat dit parlement morgen bewijst dat ik ongelijk heb en dat het wegstemmen van het wetsvoorstel in de commissie verworpen wordt, met andere woorden, dat deze plenaire vergadering niet akkoord zal gaan met de conclusies van de commissie.

Translated text

Colleagues, on March 15, this majority voted against our bill on the subject, without any accountability, without any argument or any explanation.

I can hardly believe that. With a few exceptions, everyone is in favour of our bill. So I assume that there is an error in the game. That is why I offer this plenary session – tomorrow it will be voted – the possibility of a reconsideration, namely to accept this bill anyway and not agree with the conclusions of the Committee on Home Affairs.

Everyone knows the park of Laken. That is enormously large, about 186 hectares, comparable to an average Flemish city centre or, for example, the centre of Sint-Niklaas. That large green lungs are now closed to the population. That is a regrettable thing, especially if one knows that it is located close to the densely populated canal zone. There live many people without a garden who are looking for green relaxation and recreation opportunities. However, the gardens of the park remain closed. Our bill would therefore be a fantastic opportunity.

The legal framework regarding the park is unclear and subject to interpretation. Can it be opened or not? Who should decide on this? Who should decide on the property structure? With this bill, we wanted to create clarity so that practical arrangements can be made.

The domain consists of two zones. The first is the property of the Regie der Gebäude, it concerns the castle itself and the affiliates around it. The other plots were in the past the personal property of Leopold II. They were transferred to the Belgian State in the donation act of 1900. This was later anchored in the Donation Act of 1903.

Unlike a number of other domains, the specific provision for the park of Laken does not include a provision stating that the throne successors could share the enjoyment of that property. Consequently, our interpretation is that this domain could actually be opened to the population. Therefore, we are faced with an interpretation that we wish to clarify.

Colleagues, our bill is pragmatic with respect to the royal family. It is a bill that we thought could be supported. The use of the castle and its attachments is for the royal family. The other parts could be opened to the public. That proposal was therefore not adopted. Unfortunately, this bill was rejected.

I think that is a strange thing. The Brussels government agrees. In Brussels there is a majority to allow the proposal to enter into force. In this parliament, all parties – except for the MR, if I am not mistaken – are in favor of opening the park gardens of Laken. It is surprising that this bill has been rejected.

This vivaldicoalition has a mouth full of political renewal, of openness to arguments, of listening to each other, of giving counterarguments, and so on. If I then have to conclude that our bill is rejected in the committee without any argument or any element of refutation, then I find that a regrettable matter. I can only say that political innovation is an empty box.

Mrs. Speaker, I hope that this Parliament will prove tomorrow that I am wrong and that voting against the bill in the committee is rejected, in other words, that this plenary session will not agree with the conclusions of the committee.

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6 | No English translation available to review yet.

#7 | No English translation available to review yet.

#8 | No English translation available to review yet.

#9 | No English translation available to review yet.

#10 | No English translation available to review yet.

#11 | No English translation available to review yet.

#12 | No English translation available to review yet.

#13 | No English translation available to review yet.

#14 | No English translation available to review yet.

#15 | No English translation available to review yet.

#16 | No English translation available to review yet.

#17 | No English translation available to review yet.

#18 | No English translation available to review yet.

#19 | No English translation available to review yet.

#20 | No English translation available to review yet.

#21 | No English translation available to review yet.

#22 | No English translation available to review yet.

#23 | No English translation available to review yet.

#24 | No English translation available to review yet.

#25 | No English translation available to review yet.

#26 | No English translation available to review yet.

#27 | No English translation available to review yet.

#28 | No English translation available to review yet.

#29 | No English translation available to review yet.

#30 | No English translation available to review yet.

#31 | No English translation available to review yet.

#32 | No English translation available to review yet.

#33 | No English translation available to review yet.

#34 | No English translation available to review yet.

#35 | No English translation available to review yet.

#36 | No English translation available to review yet.

#37 | No English translation available to review yet.

#38 | No English translation available to review yet.

#39 | No English translation available to review yet.

#40 | No English translation available to review yet.

#41 | No English translation available to review yet.

#42 | No English translation available to review yet.

#43 | No English translation available to review yet.

#44 | No English translation available to review yet.

#45 | No English translation available to review yet.

#46 | No English translation available to review yet.

#47 | No English translation available to review yet.

#48 | No English translation available to review yet.

#49 | No English translation available to review yet.

#50 | No English translation available to review yet.

#51 | No English translation available to review yet.

#52 | No English translation available to review yet.

#53 | No English translation available to review yet.

#54 | No English translation available to review yet.

#55 | No English translation available to review yet.

#56 | No English translation available to review yet.

#57 | No English translation available to review yet.

#58 | No English translation available to review yet.

#59 | No English translation available to review yet.

#60 | No English translation available to review yet.

#61 | No English translation available to review yet.

#62 | No English translation available to review yet.

#63 | No English translation available to review yet.

#64 | No English translation available to review yet.

#65 | No English translation available to review yet.

#66 | No English translation available to review yet.

#67 | No English translation available to review yet.

#68 | No English translation available to review yet.

#69 | No English translation available to review yet.

#70 | No English translation available to review yet.

#71 | No English translation available to review yet.

#72 | No English translation available to review yet.

#73 | No English translation available to review yet.

#74 | No English translation available to review yet.

#75 | No English translation available to review yet.

#76 | No English translation available to review yet.

#77 | No English translation available to review yet.

#78 | No English translation available to review yet.

#79 | No English translation available to review yet.

#80 | No English translation available to review yet.

#81 | No English translation available to review yet.

#82 | No English translation available to review yet.

#83 | No English translation available to review yet.

#84 | No English translation available to review yet.

#85 | No English translation available to review yet.

#86 | No English translation available to review yet.

#87 | No English translation available to review yet.

#88 | No English translation available to review yet.

#89 | No English translation available to review yet.

#90 | No English translation available to review yet.

#91 | No English translation available to review yet.

#92 | No English translation available to review yet.

#93 | No English translation available to review yet.

#94 | No English translation available to review yet.

#95 | No English translation available to review yet.

#96 | No English translation available to review yet.

#97 | No English translation available to review yet.

#98 | No English translation available to review yet.

#99 | No English translation available to review yet.

#100 | No English translation available to review yet.

#101 | No English translation available to review yet.

#102 | No English translation available to review yet.

#103 | No English translation available to review yet.

#104 | No English translation available to review yet.

#105 | No English translation available to review yet.

#106 | No English translation available to review yet.

#107 | No English translation available to review yet.

#108 | No English translation available to review yet.