Proposition 50K2395

Projet de loi portant assentiment à l'Accord entre l'Union économique belgo-luxembourgeoise et le Gouvernement de la République de Zambie concernant l'encouragement et la protection réciproques des investissements, fait à Lusaka le 28 mai 2001.

General information ¶

Submitted by

The Senate

Submission date

Feb. 19, 2003

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union Zambia international agreement international cooperation investment

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld N-VA MR FN VB

Party dissidents ¶

• Vincent Decroly (Ecolo) voted to reject.
• Jacques Lefevre (LE) abstained from voting.
• Geert Versnick (Open Vld) abstained from voting.

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

April 3, 2003 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, in a response to a written parliamentary question published in our Bulletin of Questions and Answers of 3 February 2003, Mrs. Minister informs me of how this type of agreement is prepared within her department and in collaboration, she explains, with representatives of the regional authorities of our country, the National Bank, the FBI and the Ducroire, but also - it is quite interesting - of the Belgian Association of Banks, of Fedichem, of Agoria - of the well-known federations of employers in our country - and of course of the FEB with a consultative voice.

This is a fairly interesting information element and I would like to know why neither trade union organizations nor NGOs are associated, for example with a consultative voice themselves, with this type of process. In social and environmental matters or in human rights matters, they are ⁇ very interested in what is being prepared in this type of bilateral investment agreements.

And in order not to return for the thirteenth or fourteenth time to all the reasoned criticisms, both political and legal, that one can do to these sinister bilateral agreements on investment and the networks that are being reconstructed and that will likely bring back from its ashes the multilateral investment agreement suspended in 1998, I would like to know – since these are agreements on mutual protection of investments – whether your partners of the Belgian Association of Banks, Fedichem, Agoria or FEB have informed you, Mrs. Minister, of Zambia’s investment projects on Belgian territory. Could our assembly possibly know what types of investments they are talking about? This could ⁇ demonstrate that there is a mutual promotion and protection of investments, and not a rather authoritarian projection of our model of economic development and our vision of what investments in developing countries should serve.

In her response to my written parliamentary question published on 3 February 2003, the Minister explained to me how this type of agreement is established, in consultation with the regional authorities but also with the National Bank, the BMI, the Delcreder Service, the Belgian Association of Banks, Fedichem, Agoria and the VBO, which have an advisory voice. Why were the trade unions and NGOs not involved in those work, which would ⁇ interest them? I will not extend further on the pernicious multiplication of the bilateral investment agreements, as a precursor of demarches to re-fish the multilateral agreement suspended in 1998.

Thank you Mr Decroly. There are no other members registered in the general discussion.

I would have been

I apologize if the review of all these projects had concluded without the intervention of Mr. and Decroly. I’m glad that he doesn’t call all this “ratifying rage,” a beautiful expression he used in a previous debate on a similar topic.

The agreements, of which this is an example, Mr Decroly, were concluded within the framework of an initiative of the UNCED for a conference on development planned by it, for the least developed countries. This conference was held in Brussels during the Belgian Presidency of the European Union.

The UNICEF urged member states of the United Nations to conclude as many such investment protection agreements as possible, with as many countries as possible belonging to or belonging to the category of least developed countries.

On behalf of Belgium, I have paraphed a number of these agreements and, if I remember well, the number of agreements paraphed by our country was the largest among the member countries of the United Nations to have concluded such agreements. If my memory is true, Zambia, in the last minute, did not participate in this conference in Brussels and the agreement was finally signed in Lusaka.

This is, therefore, a context in which developing countries, including the least developed countries, are themselves demanding foreign investment because they consider – in my opinion rightly and ⁇ your judgment will be more mixed – that such investments are powerful development leverage. That is why they are ready to sign these mutual agreements, at least bilateral. This is the usual way to proceed. I personally have no knowledge of very precise Zambian investments or projects in Belgium but I know that Zambia is especially interested in investment projects of all types, including SMEs, on their territory.

As for the answer you recalled, I think it was more about the preparation of the WTO negotiations and, above all, that they could be about investments.

We are not yet at this stage. Indeed, it will be, in principle, at the end of the current negotiation cycle, that we will eventually decide, eventually by mutual agreement, to start the investment negotiations. The favourite Loch Ness monster. Vincent Decroly is not yet close to resurrection. You knew that the multilateral agreement was dead-born. I am just as happy as you are for the reasons we have explained to ourselves, but he is not near to rise. by

In the framework of the WTO, with the aim and ambition to practice the greatest possible transparency, I meet, at regular intervals, with the various segments of the Federal Council for Sustainable Development, of which the social partners are part. Furthermore, I consult the various industrial and economic sectors concerned and I also consult the trade unions separately on these issues, among other things, on the whole important issue of the negotiations that will open, more than likely very soon, on the trade of services. would be disappointed to have been as of Mr. Decroly het woord niet zou have gevoerd in a bespreking over a design as said. I am blij dat hij of the term 'ratificatiewoede', die in soortgelijke debatten al werd gebruikt, niet in de mond has genome.

This is an initiative of the UNCTAD, with a view to the Conference on the Development of the Least Developed Countries of the same UNCTAD, held in Brussels, under the Belgian presidency.

The UNCTAD has urged the members of the United Nations to conclude as many agreements as possible to protect investments with the least developed countries. Zambia did not participate in the conference in Brussels, which states that the agreement was signed in Lusaka.

The least developed countries are the demanding party, as they see foreign investment as a powerful lever for development. I doubt that there are many Zambia investments in Belgium, but there is always work through bilateral agreements.

Mr Decroly’s question was essentially about the negotiations within the WTO. However, we must first wait for the end of the ongoing negotiation cycle before we can start new negotiations, if everyone agrees. The Loch Ness monster that Mr. Decroly likes to talk about is therefore not yet.

In order to ensure the transparency of the process, I will consult the Federal Council for Sustainable Development and the social partners, specifically the trade unions, on the trade in services.

I would like to thank the Minister. The answer is to bring about a certain

Out of the answer many additional information elements. by

Under his response, it seems that the participation of the employer and banking federations, which I have cited, in the preparatory process has actually related to a working group bilateral investment agreements. But ⁇ there is a similar process — this complements my information — on various other workshops in progress at the WTO. I remain convinced that there is little reciprocity in this type of agreement. The Minister’s response on Zambia indicates that it is more about protecting Belgian interests in Zambia than vice versa. by

In conclusion, there is nothing to do: there are investments and investments, in the same way that there is compromises and compromises. Some investments are ⁇ beneficial to the countries in which they are made, while others are extremely detrimental to them. Last June riots in Arequipa, Peru’s second-largest city, where mayors, governors of states or provinces campaigned against certain projects of investment, exclusion or redemption of our Tractebel – it was, indeed, there for the redemption of public enterprises of energy production and distribution – show that every investment is not good in itself. Any investment does not guarantee the well-being of the population or sustainable development or development compatible with the protection of resources, including environmental resources.

I fear that despite certain clauses, which have been artificially added to these framework agreements, to these model agreements in recent months, on the social and environmental level, bilateral investment agreements are more devastating than improving. I even think, contrary to what Ms. Minister will probably believe until September, that in Cancun, this type of bilateral investment agreements will pre-shape the pillar, from which one will try, for the third time, to reconstruct a multilateral investment agreement., This is already announced on some websites of the European Commission itself.

I am very concerned and very concerned about this because it is not only about the trade of services, as in the context of the AGCS currently often discussed, but it is about any economic or financial asset, any type of investment, direct or indirect, and therefore a scope of a much larger and deeper scope, much more structural or destructive on the global economy than anything we have seen so far.

I am afraid that the bilateral investment agreement that we may be voting for just now is just an additional contribution — the 44th since the beginning of this legislature, which is quite spectacular — to globalization. We see a genuine globalizing zeal on the part of the government that you form with mr. Deleuze and Mrs. Onkelinx. In the history of our country, since 1964, only 75 or 76 bilateral investment agreements have been signed. We have just ratified 43, in just four years. This is still quite spectacular for a government whose important components claim to worry about the possible damage of globalization and want a globalization other than purely neo-liberal. Van minister Neyts blijkt heel duidelijk dat de eerste bedoeling is of Belgian investment in Zambia te beschermen.

There are several types of investments, as the recent uprising in Arrequipa, Peru, demonstrates against the acquisition of public energy distribution companies.

I am afraid that these investments, which will cause a social massacre and prove to be nefaste for the preservation of the wealth, are a foreshadowing of the basement on which one is once again trying to build a multilateral investment agreement. This is the 44th agreement of this type that is being ratified during this parliamentary period; this government with Mr. Deleuze and Mrs. Onkelinx is truly attentive to globalization.