plenum van 2018-12-20 14:15:00+00:00 in Chamber of representatives

General information

Full name: plenum van 2018-12-20 14:15:00+00:00 in Chamber of representatives
Type: plenum
URL: https://www.dekamer.be/doc/PCRI/html/54/ip264x.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
54K3395	29/11/2018	✔	Projet de loi relatif à la transposition de la directive (UE) 2016/2341 du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 14 décembre 2016 concernant les activités et la surveillance des institutions de retraite professionnelle (IRP) et modifiant la loi du 27 octobre 2006 relative au contrôle des institutions de retraite professionnelle.
54K3391	22/11/2018	✔	Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 26 avril 2002 relative aux éléments essentiels du statut des membres du personnel des services de police et portant diverses autres dispositions relatives aux services de police.
54K3416	11/12/2018	✔	Proposition de résolution visant à repositionner la Belgique dans le débat climatique.
54K1564	08/01/2016	✘	Proposition de loi modifiant l'arrêté royal nº 38 du 27 juillet 1967 organisant le statut social des travailleurs indépendants, visant à diminuer et déplafonner les cotisations sociales des travailleurs indépendants.
54K3303	08/10/2018	✔	Projet de loi portant des dispositions diverses en matière de justice.
54K2298	06/02/2017	✔	Proposition de résolution visant à mettre l'accent sur la prévention et le bien-être afin de réduire le nombre d'indépendants en incapacité de travail.
54K3406	29/11/2018	✔	Projet de loi modifiant des dispositions relatives à la politique scientifique, la police intégrée et la défense.
54K3258	12/09/2018	✔	Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 1er août 1985 portant des mesures fiscales et autres en ce qui concerne l'aide aux victimes du terrorisme.
54K3371	19/11/2018	✔	Projet de loi modifiant le Code ferroviaire.
54K3400	29/11/2018	✔	Projet de loi portant des mesures de lutte contre la fraude et l'évasion fiscales en matière de précompte mobilier.
54K2686	04/10/2017	✘	Proposition de résolution relative au contrôle du démarchage téléphonique.

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	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#109	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#110	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#111	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#112	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#113	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#114	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#115	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#116	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#117	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#118	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#119	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#120	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#121	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#122	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#123	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#124	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#125	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#126	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#127	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#128	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#129	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#130	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#131	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#132	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#133	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#134	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#135	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#136	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#137	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#138	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#139	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#140	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#141	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#142	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#143	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#144	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#145	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#146	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#147	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#148	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#149	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#150	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#151	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#152	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★
#153	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#154	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#155	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#156	⚠	★	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠
#157	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	⚠	★

#0

Official text

                    
                    Monsieur le président, madame et monsieur les ministres, chers collègues, pour établir un lien entre le précédent débat sur le Code ferroviaire et le point à présent en discussion, j'ai envie de dire que le groupe PS souhaite mettre un meilleur statut social des indépendants sur de bons rails.

Ensuite, lorsque mon groupe a décidé de réinscrire ce point – à savoir notre proposition relative au déplafonnement et à la diminution des cotisations sociales pour les travailleurs indépendants – à l'ordre du jour de la séance plénière de la Chambre, nous ne savions pas que nous le défendrions devant un gouvernement minoritaire, puis démissionnaire. Ce sont les aléas de la vie politique. Dans ce nouveau contexte, les lignes peuvent bouger, comme cela fut démontré lors du débat précédent relatif à la période de carence des travailleurs indépendants. Nous nous en réjouissons. Sur la base de ce qui fut dit tout à l'heure, nous allons pouvoir approuver une proposition de résolution qui recommande au gouvernement de supprimer cette fameuse période de carence, dont l'effet consiste le plus souvent à reporter les soins de santé dont ont besoin les travailleurs indépendants, mais auxquels ils n'accèdent pas pour des raisons économiques.

Sur ce point, adresser des recommandations à un gouvernement démissionnaire est positif en soi. Néanmoins, cela reste insuffisant. Une résolution, c'est bien; mais une loi, c'est encore mieux. La première relève, si je puis me permettre, du blabla parlementaire; la seconde constitue une action concrète pour les travailleurs concernés. Dès lors, j'espère qu'ensemble nous pourrons accomplir un pas décisif. Le PS a déposé en ce sens une proposition de loi: le document n° 3098. Je suggère de l'inscrire prioritairement à l'ordre du jour de la commission de l'Économie, afin que nous puissions passer des paroles aux actes. J'espère qu'un consensus se dégagera en vue d'atteindre cet objectif auquel nous sommes tous attachés.

Ce propos introductif étant fait, chers collègues, j'en viens au sentiment qu'il existe un large consensus dans cette assemblée pour renforcer et améliorer le statut social des travailleurs indépendants.

Translated text

Mr. Speaker, Mrs. and Mr. Ministers, dear colleagues, in order to establish a link between the previous debate on the Railway Code and the point now discussed, I want to say that the PS group wants to put a better social status of independent workers on the right track.

Then, when my group decided to reinsert this point – namely our proposal on displacement and the reduction of social contributions for self-employed workers – on the agenda of the House plenary session, we did not know that we would defend it before a minority government and then resign. These are the values of political life. In this new context, the lines can move, as demonstrated in the previous debate on the period of shortage for self-employed workers. We are delighted with this. Based on what has just been said, we will be able to approve a proposal for a resolution that recommends the government to remove this famous period of shortage, the effect of which is most often to postpone the health care needed by self-employed workers, but to which they do not have access for economic reasons.

In this regard, sending recommendations to a resigning government is positive in itself. However, this remains insufficient. A resolution is good; but a law is even better. The first is, if I can afford, a parliamentary blabla; the second is a concrete action for the workers concerned. I hope that together we can make a decisive step. The PS has submitted a bill in this sense: Document No. 3098. I suggest that it be prioritised on the agenda of the Economic Committee, so that we can move from words to deeds. I hope that a consensus will emerge in order to ⁇  this goal to which we are all committed.

With this introductory statement, I come to the feeling that there is a broad consensus in this assembly to strengthen and improve the social status of self-employed workers.

#1

Official text

                    
                    Vu le contexte, je passe l'historique et je réduis un peu l'intervention que je comptais faire pour vous parler plus spécifiquement de notre volonté, non seulement de revaloriser le statut des travailleurs indépendants, mais aussi de donner une inflexion plus spécifique qui est la défense des "petits indépendants". Ce n'est pas une question de taille. C'est une question de revenus. Je parle ici de celles et ceux qui ont les revenus les moins importants. Cela a toujours été notre ligne de conduite sur plusieurs dossiers.

On a appréhendé la question de la pension complémentaire du deuxième pilier par le fait que, finalement, ce qui nous était proposé ne profitait qu'à 4 ou 5 % des indépendants avec les plus hauts revenus. On a appréhendé le débat sur les travailleurs de l'économie de plate-forme aussi au travers de cette ligne de conduite. Idem, nous avons soutenu l'abaissement des taux de cotisation des indépendants de 22 à 20,5 %. Par contre, nous nous sommes opposés au tax shift car le glissement vers une fiscalité de la consommation ne profite pas aux travailleurs qui ont les plus faibles revenus, en ce compris les travailleurs indépendants.

La véritable ligne de partage ne se situe pas entre ceux qui défendent les salariés ou les indépendants mais plutôt entre ceux qui prennent des mesures qui favorisent les hauts revenus et ceux ou celles qui veulent des mesures qui bénéficient d'abord aux travailleurs indépendants qui peinent à boucler les fins de mois. Je rappelle qu'aujourd'hui, un travailleur indépendant sur six vit sous le seuil de pauvreté.

Quelle est la situation aujourd'hui en matière de cotisations sociales? Un indépendant qui perçoit des revenus modestes de 20 000 à 30 000 euros par an paie aujourd'hui 20,5 % de cotisations sociales, alors qu'une personne qui bénéficie de revenus de 150 000 euros et plus ne paie au total que 10 % de cotisations sociales. J'ai envie de dire que c'est la solidarité à l'envers. Ce n'est évidemment pas normal. Ce n'est pas juste et nous estimons que les indépendants à faibles revenus cotisent trop, beaucoup trop proportionnellement aux indépendants qui ont de plus gros revenus. Le système actuel est à la fois dégressif et plafonné. Il y a, aujourd'hui, trois taux. Je le rappelle car on est ici au cœur du débat. Il y a un taux de 20,5 % pour la tranche de revenus inférieurs à 58 000 euros. Il y a un taux de 14,16 % pour la tranche de revenus entre 58 000 et 86 000 euros et il y a ce taux de 0 % pour la tranche de revenus supérieurs à 86 000 euros.

Translated text

Given the context, I pass the historical and I reduce a little the intervention I intended to do to speak to you more specifically of our will, not only to revalue the status of self-employed workers, but also to give a more specific inflexion that is the defense of the "small self-employed". It is not a matter of size. It is a matter of income. I am talking about those who have the lowest income. This has always been our line of conduct on several cases.

The issue of the second pillar supplementary pension was addressed by the fact that, in the end, what was offered to us only benefited 4 or 5% of the self-employed with the highest incomes. The debate on the workers of the platform economy has also been grasped through this line of conduct. In addition, we supported the reduction of the self-employed contributions rate from 22 to 20.5%. On the other hand, we opposed the tax shift because the shift to a consumption taxation does not benefit the workers with the lowest income, including self-employed.

The real line of division is not between those who defend employees or self-employed, but rather between those who take measures that promote high incomes and those or those who want measures that benefit first to self-employed workers who struggle to close the end of the month. Today, one in six self-employed people live below the poverty line.

What is the situation today in terms of social contributions? A self-employed person who earns modest incomes of €20,000 to €30,000 per year now pays 20.5% of social contributions, while a person who earns €150,000 or more pays a total of only 10% of social contributions. I would like to say that solidarity is the reverse. This is obviously not normal. This is not fair and we believe that low-income self-employed contribute too much, much too proportionally to the self-employed who have higher incomes. The current system is both degressive and ceiling. There are now three rates. This is because we are at the heart of the debate. There is a rate of 20.5% for the income section of less than 58,000 euros. There is a rate of 14.16% for the income segment between 58,000 and 86,000 euros and there is this rate of 0% for the income segment above 86,000 euros.

#2

Official text

                    
                    Cela veut dire que, dans le cas des montants dépassant un certain plafond, les indépendants qui gagnent ces montants ne participent pas du tout à la solidarité sociale, et ce n'est pas normal. Après avoir été effectivement déboutés en commission, nous souhaitions rouvrir la discussion sur cette proposition de loi, sans savoir évidemment dans quel contexte nous allions nous trouver aujourd'hui. On a reçu des avis écrits qui permettent, en tout cas, de rouvrir et de baliser ce débat. On regrette que le débat n'ait pas été possible à la suite de la note du ministre en commission.

Nous proposons donc de déplafonner et d'instaurer un taux unique de cotisations sociales pour l'ensemble des travailleurs indépendants. Telle est la position que nous avons défendue et qui nous paraît la plus équitable entre tous les revenus.

Bien entendu, comme nous l'avons dit en commission, nous sommes prêts à discuter des modalités; nous ne voulons pas imposer un pourcentage. Initialement, nous étions partis sur le taux unique de 20,5 %, ce qui aurait eu deux conséquences, en ce sens que les petits indépendants ne paieraient pas moins qu'aujourd'hui, et que le système dégagerait des moyens budgétaires pour élargir la couverture sociale.

En commission, le ministre Ducarme nous a dit que, sur cette base-là, des recettes supplémentaires arriveraient dans les caisses du système à concurrence de 320 millions d'euros, moyens qui pourraient être utilisés pour financer des prestations sociales supplémentaires. Nous pensons à un élargissement du droit de passerelle, à une allocation de remplacement dès le premier jour de maladie ou d'invalidité ou encore au congé de paternité pour les indépendants. On peut en tout cas en discuter.

On peut aussi dire que, finalement, il n'est pas nécessaire d'alimenter davantage le système, les comptes de l'INASTI étant en boni structurel depuis plusieurs années: 316 millions d'euros en 2017 et 170 millions d'euros en 2018. On peut donc également fixer un taux unique de façon à ce que la mesure soit neutre sur le plan budgétaire. Nous avons fait cet exercice; nous avons fait ce calcul et, par amendement, nous proposons un taux unique de 18 % pour tous les indépendants. Nous l'avons donc introduit sur la base d'un amendement.

Si nous prenons cette mesure, nous ne dégageons pas de moyens supplémentaires pour l'INASTI. Cela veut dire que le régime des indépendants ne contribue pas plus qu'aujourd'hui. Par contre, tous les indépendants qui gagnent moins de 88 000 euros verront leur facture diminuer. Il s'agit ici de 96 % des indépendants, soit un million d'indépendants concernés par cette mesure.

Translated text

This means that, in the case of amounts exceeding a certain ceiling, the self-employed who earn these amounts do not participate in social solidarity at all, and this is not normal. After being effectively defeated in committee, we wanted to reopen the discussion on this bill, without obviously knowing in what context we would find ourselves today. We have received written opinions that allow, in any case, to reopen and signage this debate. It is regrettable that the debate was not possible following the note of the Minister in committee.

We therefore propose to move and introduce a single rate of social contributions for all self-employed workers. This is the position that we have defended and which we think is the most equitable of all incomes.

Of course, as we said in the committee, we are ready to discuss the terms; we do not want to impose a percentage. Initially, we started on the single rate of 20.5%, which would have had two consequences, in the sense that the small self-employed would pay no less than today, and that the system would release budgetary resources to expand social coverage.

In the commission, Minister Ducarme told us that, on this basis, additional revenues would come to the system's treasuries at the expense of €320 million, funds that could be used to finance additional social benefits. We think of an extension of the right of gateway, a replacement allowance from the first day of illness or disability or even paternity leave for self-employed. In any case, we can discuss it.

It can also be said that, in the end, there is no need to feed the system more, the accounts of the INASTI being in structural bonuses for several years: 316 million euros in 2017 and 170 million euros in 2018. Therefore, a single rate may also be set in such a way that the measure is budgetally neutral. We did this exercise; we did this calculation and, by amendment, we propose a single rate of 18% for all self-employed. So we introduced it on the basis of an amendment.

If we take this measure, we will not issue any additional funds for INASTI. This means that the independent regime does not contribute more than it does today. In contrast, all self-employed workers who earn less than 88,000 euros will see their bill decreased. This is 96% of the independent workers, or a million independent workers concerned by this measure.

#3

Official text

                    
                    Bien sûr, ce sont surtout les petits indépendants qui verront leur facture s'alléger. Un indépendant qui gagne 30 000 euros fera un gain de 750 euros par an. Un indépendant qui gagne 40 000 euros fera une économie de 1 000 euros par an. Les femmes qui gagnent en moyenne beaucoup moins que les hommes dans le régime sont actuellement structurellement lésées par le système en place.

Chers collègues, je voulais simplement résumer et rappeler le contenu de notre proposition de loi. Je rappelle qu'elle a effectivement été rejetée par l'ancienne majorité en commission. Mais, puisque les lignes ont bougé et que le débat est ouvert, puisque les mains sont tendues entre ex-majorité et ex-opposition – ai-je envie de dire –, le Parlement peut prendre ses responsabilités en toute autonomie. Je vous invite à y réfléchir au moment du vote et à soutenir cette disposition qui bénéficiera finalement au pouvoir d'achat des indépendants dans leur grande majorité.

Ne rejetez pas cette proposition parce qu'elle vise à instaurer plus de solidarité entre les hauts et les petits revenus. Je pense que les indépendants, qui ont aujourd'hui des difficultés à nouer les deux bouts en fin de mois, méritent mieux que le vote de rejet silencieux auquel ils ont eu droit en commission. J'espère, chers collègues, qu'il en sera autrement en séance plénière.

Translated text

Of course, it is especially the small self-employed who will see their bills lessen. An independent employee who earns 30,000 euros will earn 750 euros per year. An independent employee who earns 40,000 euros will save 1,000 euros per year. Women who earn on average much less than men in the diet are currently structurally damaged by the system in place.

Dear colleagues, I just wanted to summarize and recall the content of our bill. It was rejected by the former majority in the committee. But since the lines have moved and the debate is open, since the hands are stretched between the ex-majority and the ex-opposition – I want to say – the Parliament can take its responsibilities in full autonomy. I invite you to reflect on this at the time of the vote and to support this provision which will ultimately benefit the purchasing power of the independent in their vast majority.

Do not reject this proposal because it aims to establish more solidarity between high and low incomes. I think that the Independents, who today have difficulty linking the two ends at the end of the month, deserve better than the silent vote of rejection to which they were entitled in commission. I hope it will be different in the plenary session.

#4 | No English translation available to review yet.

#5 | No English translation available to review yet.

#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.

#109 | No English translation available to review yet.

#110 | No English translation available to review yet.

#111 | No English translation available to review yet.

#112 | No English translation available to review yet.

#113 | No English translation available to review yet.

#114 | No English translation available to review yet.

#115 | No English translation available to review yet.

#116 | No English translation available to review yet.

#117 | No English translation available to review yet.

#118 | No English translation available to review yet.

#119 | No English translation available to review yet.

#120 | No English translation available to review yet.

#121 | No English translation available to review yet.

#122 | No English translation available to review yet.

#123 | No English translation available to review yet.

#124 | No English translation available to review yet.

#125 | No English translation available to review yet.

#126 | No English translation available to review yet.

#127 | No English translation available to review yet.

#128 | No English translation available to review yet.

#129 | No English translation available to review yet.

#130 | No English translation available to review yet.

#131 | No English translation available to review yet.

#132 | No English translation available to review yet.

#133 | No English translation available to review yet.

#134 | No English translation available to review yet.

#135 | No English translation available to review yet.

#136 | No English translation available to review yet.

#137 | No English translation available to review yet.

#138 | No English translation available to review yet.

#139 | No English translation available to review yet.

#140 | No English translation available to review yet.

#141 | No English translation available to review yet.

#142 | No English translation available to review yet.

#143 | No English translation available to review yet.

#144 | No English translation available to review yet.

#145 | No English translation available to review yet.

#146 | No English translation available to review yet.

#147 | No English translation available to review yet.

#148 | No English translation available to review yet.

#149 | No English translation available to review yet.

#150 | No English translation available to review yet.

#151 | No English translation available to review yet.

#152 | No English translation available to review yet.

#153 | No English translation available to review yet.

#154 | No English translation available to review yet.

#155 | No English translation available to review yet.

#156 | No English translation available to review yet.

#157 | No English translation available to review yet.