Proposition 51K1351

Projet de loi modifiant les lois des 1er mars 1958 relative aux statuts des officiers de carrière des forces armées, 27 décembre 1961 relative au statut des sous-officiers du cadre actif des forces armées et 12 juillet 1973 relative au statut des volontaires du cadre actif des forces armées.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP MR Open Vld Vooruit Purple Ⅰ

Submission date

Sept. 27, 2004

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

armed forces disciplinary proceedings

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Vooruit PS | SP Open Vld MR FN VB

Abstained from voting

Ecolo

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 ¶

Dec. 16, 2004 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Ms. Douifi refers to her written report, which, by the way, is not very long.

Is there a report?

and yes. The Document No. 1351/004 of 15 December 2004 has 14 pages.

Where is the rapporteur? There is controversy about the report. I do not know where the rapporteur is. Mrs. Douifi is the rapporteur and our group would like to hear the report.

Mr. De Crem, is there something wrong with the report?

This issue relates to Article 78 of the Constitution and we would have liked to hear the report. It is about the volunteers and the reform of the military. The Minister of Defence is not here. Unless the ladies Mandaila or Van Weert or Mr Demotte who are incredibly embroiled in the defense of the country would see these interests here, though I do not know of what power they are. Here is the rapporteur.

Ms. Douifi, you are the rapporteur of Bill No. by 1351. Your report dates from 15 December and was printed and distributed on time. You are urged to submit your report or comment on it at least verbally. The choice is up to you.

Mr. Speaker, I intended to refer to the written report.

Mr. De Crem, you have no report? I have one.

I have no report.

I have the document number. 1351/004 entitled "Report of the Committee for the Defense of the Land, issued by Mrs. Douifi".

We left home very early this morning. We cannot always count on the cooperation of the Post. We have not yet received the new judgment of the State Council’s case regarding the tax amnesty. I would like to know from the rapporteur why this is a matter that also includes Article 78 of the Constitution. We can ask questions to the rapporteur. It is not bicameral.

The State Council has not commented on this. I have the report.

I have no report. You have the same postman as that of the Council of State, which passes by Minister Reynders. In any case, the colleagues here did not have the report on this matter. I want to know from the rapporteur why it is not monocameral, but bicameral. I think this is an essential question and the control right of a member of parliament. Their

Imagine that we would no longer have volunteers for Mr. Flahaut.

Mr. De Crem, I have to apologize. I hear from Mrs. De Prince that the report is not yet in the banks. I have been a bit prejudiced towards you. I humbly apologize for this.

Mr. Speaker, if the rapporteur now reports orally, we are willing to work without a written report. Especially the bicamerality interests us, not so much the content, but the bicameral aspect.

Can you explain your report? It is printed and is here with me.

Mr. Speaker, especially the senators are ⁇ concerned, because they normally get seen — if it goes well — tomorrow the program law, but they also want to know what in this matter is their competence.

This is a separate bill that has nothing to do with the program law. Mr De Crem, this bill was submitted on 7 September 2004. It was discussed in the committee on 17 November and 1 December. It has nothing to do with the program law.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, it is actually Mrs. Douifi who must issue the report, not you.

I have a solution. The bill will be discussed next week; next week, la semaine prochaine, next week.

The consequences are for the family.

Mr. Tante, it is delayed to next week. So keep your consequences for next week.

Mr. Speaker, I know that too. I would only say that we will not give any explanation about these laws now, although we can.

No, because after this vote, the bills will be put to the vote. Then I will give the voting statements. So is it. You are too impatient.

We can now give an explanation on all these laws. However, we will not do that. We will announce our position later in a vote statement.

I will wait until enough people are present to start the nominal vote. Then comes the four or five bills that concrete the name vote in a certain sense. Their

The proposal with the document number 1446/2 is now under vote. But in order to make your life easier, I would ask you to perform the three secret moods at the same time.

For the sake of clarity, the following. You said that on page 173 the eighth name is deleted.

Deleted and sent to the Commission for Naturalizations.

Mr. Speaker, what is the reason for this? Arrest or persecution? Why should this name be deleted? I thought there was a favorable advice given in the Committee on Naturalizations, concerning the full list. If this is not the case, we cannot approve this list.

Of course, I will not say anything about the names. I can only say that we had a precedent on 15 March 2001. The person’s file was returned to the commission for further investigation. Their

This is done at the request of the Commission services.

However, it is essential that the Commissioners are informed of the reasons for this request. Our members may not know what it is about, so I ask the President of the Commission to explain the reason for the request to remove a name from the list.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to join this simple and obvious request. Even our people do not know what it is about. I think this is a 22-year-old Czech. This is a country that is now a member of the EU. The EU will soon have a new member, notably Turkey. The Prime Minister is committed to this. This can also cause problems. I would like to know what exactly it is about here.

After the submission, a document has been received which I would like to submit again to the Committee on Naturalizations. Nothing else can be said in the plenary session.

Mr. Speaker, I think you cannot decide on this. I suggest the following. Either this list of naturalizations is postponed, or the session is suspended and the Committee for Naturalizations now meets and decides on this matter.

Mr. De Crem, that doesn’t come in 8 days.

Then put them out.

In very difficult circumstances, it happens that we ask to re-examine some of the names of the list then inserted. This was a precedent three years ago. If you want the document in its entirety to go back to the committee, do not leave it for me. I would like the committee to meet this week so that we can vote on this matter next week. I hear that the committee meets tomorrow, Mr. Hove.

Indeed Mr President. However, I will not give the reason for the delay in the plenary session because it is an individual case. After the hearing, additional information about this file was received, which is responsible for re-examining the file in the committee.

Mr. De Crem’s request is not unreasonable. There is some uncertainty about the procedure to be followed. I would not want the whole procedure that we now follow for the other persons to be put at risk. The question is reasonable to the extent that, in my opinion, this list can be submitted back next week.

Do not leave me!

This, of course, is of principle. In this plenary session, you make a communication on a file, while the members of the naturalization committee are not aware that there is a problem. It is one or the other. Either the committee is fully informed and there is a transparent decision making. Or something is being done here that is actually better not to see the daylight. Their

If it turns out that, contrary to the legal determination of the deadlines in the Fast-Belg Act, we should get information here at eleven o’clock again that causes Parliament to review the decision, then I hope that next week everyone will have the courage to say that the deadlines in the law are of such nature that we really create risks here.

Mr. Van den Eynde, I don’t want a private case to be harmed. I will send this document back to the committee. Mr. Hove, I ask you to meet with your committee on this matter tomorrow, after which you will return me the list, with or without no name. This issue will be returned to the committee.

Please do not apologize, but do not exaggerate. There is no reason, unless one wants to give the PS once again a gift, to deal with this matter tomorrow.

Mr. Van den Eynde, the committee meets tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, they come together to examine the files.

That is the wisdom of the Commission.

One must deal with things with ratio and wisdom. Here something is hunted with a karwats, as Schiltz said at the time, by the Parliament. That is never healthy.

The committee will decide tomorrow. I do not decide in the place of the committee. Mr. Chairman of the Committee on Naturalizations, tomorrow your committee will meet and you will make a decision on this matter.

We will vote for the following two positions, a position of advisor to the Court of Auditors (French-speaking Chamber) and a secretary (Dutch-speaking Chamber).

A l'appel de son nom, chaque membre est prié de venir déposer son bulletin non signé dans l'urne, and montant à la tribune, the ma gauche à ma droite. I ask each member to come and deposit his unsealed ballot note in the ballot box when calling his name. Please come along my left side on the speaker’s seat and leave this on my right side.

You rappelle qu'il y a place de voter and traçant une croix dans la cas figurant en regard du nom du candidat choisi. Sont nuls, les suffrages exprimés and faveur de plus d'un candidat. To vote, a cross is placed in the box opposite the name of the elected candidate. The votes cast on more than one candidate are invalid.

I invite the secretaries to proceed with the nominal appeal. I need secretaries out of names by calling you.

The nominal appeal is made. It is overgegaan tot of naamafroeping. Did everyone put their ballot in the urn? Has everybody gestemd? (Ja) I declare the vote closed and invite the scrutinizers to proceed with the disposal. Voting is closed. I need secretaries out over you go to stemopneming.

Mr. Speaker, for this vote and for the subsequent votes, I paired with Mrs. Deom.

Ladies and gentlemen, I ask for your attention. It’s a complex vote, but if the colleagues who have submitted amendments want to be something shabby — I ask them it kindly — we can go faster.

I have very carefully allowed everyone to defend the amendments and without limitation of time. The Chamber must therefore be sufficiently informed and the Chairman of the Chamber is ⁇ one of those members who have faced each of these articles.

Vote on Koen Bultinck's Amendment No. 10 to delete Article 2. Therefore, we vote for the maintenance of the article.

Mr. Speaker, I have a vote agreement with Mr. Goris for this and other votes.

Mijnheer de voorzitter, I have tegengestemd. Vote on amendment no. 24 of the Board of Directors of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Parliament. Therefore, we vote for the maintenance of the article.

Mr. Speaker, I have a vote agreement for this, past and future votes with Mrs. Avontroodt. Vote sur l'amendement n° 21 de Greta D'hondt cs tendant à insérer un article 15bis (n).

I voted red as the standard.

Rouge the honte. (Rires) Voting on amendment no. 36 of Greta D'hondt cs introducing an article 57bis (n).

Mr. Speaker, you seem to be in a hurry but I would like to point out that we are calling for a change in the vote. It would be easier to stop immediately than to go to the end and have to start all over again. You do as you hear it.

Sorry to me. These amendments are all in the same sequence, if I can say. What amendment do you want to vote on? I listen to you.

Following the amendment

I am sorry, please apologize. We will vote on Amendment 37. by

Voting on Amendment No. 37 of Greta D'Hondt and Nahima Lanjri introducing an article 58bis(n).

( ... ...

I take note of your vote in favour of the amendment.

Voting on Amendment No. 16 of Greta D'hondt cs introducing articles 193 bis and 193ter (n).

Yes, abstinence and yes respectively were voted on this line. Voting on Amendment No. 17 of Greta D'hondt cs introducing articles 194bis and 194ter (n).

I supported it, but it does not work.

You need to support.

Voting on Amendment No. 18 of Greta D'hondt cs introducing articles 199bis to 199duodecies (n).

There is no statement of abstinence when voting on an amendment. You should also know that. There is no refusal to explain an amendment. You are sure of that, right?

Voting on Amendment No. 7 by Muriel Gerkens on article

Mr. Speaker, I have been reminded.

I have seen that. You all know that there is no responsibility for abstaining from an amendment. It is as old as the world. You may abstain from a final vote.

Mr. Speaker, as part of your party, I think it would be good to have Pierre say something.

Only, it is good. Their

Voting on Amendment No. 58 of Van der Auwera cs to add an article 273bis (n).

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know if the majority will vote against their own resolution.

Beginning of the vote / Beginning of the vote. Has everyone voted and checked their vote? All the world has voted and verified its vote. End of voting / End of voting. Results of the vote / Results of the vote. (Voting/voting 37) Yes 43 Oui No 90 Non Abstentions 3 Abstentions Total 136 Total Therefore the amendment was rejected. Consequently, the amendment is rejected.

Voting on Amendment No. 1 by Dirk Claes on article

What is happening? Has something gone wrong? (Yes) is

In this case, we will restart this vote.

Beginning of the vote / Beginning of the vote. Has everyone voted and checked their vote? All the world has voted and verified its vote. End of voting / End of voting. Results of the vote / Results of the vote. (Voting/voting 40) Yes 91 Oui No 24 Non Abstentions 23 Abstentions Total 138 Total Consequently Article 487 was adopted. Article 487 is adopted.

Amendment No. 2 of Dirk Claes aims at deleting Article 488. We therefore vote for the preservation of the article.

I will not disappoint my friends of the majority, nor will I disappoint my friends of the opposition. (Applause) I will approve this program law because I wish to be solidary with the majority and because I find many good points in it, but you all know — I wish to repeat it again — that I have refrained from the Elia tax. It is a very good principle that the municipalities will get back what they have lost, but I think the redistribution is not correct. Their

Instead of speaking in general principles, colleagues, I put a paper on your bench.

I have put up a document with the taxes – listen carefully; I think it is necessary that you reflect – of a single company since 2001. Energy taxes 2001: 50,000. There are also regional taxes. In 2002 there were 370,000, in 2003 there were 1,000,000, in 2004 there were 1,300,000, in 2005 without Elijah there were 1,600,000, and with Elijah there were 2,000,000. Their

Well, start counting and start thinking! (Applause - The song "Happy Friends" is removed)

Mr. Speaker, after this intimate conversation between Mrs. De Block and Mr. Lano, I still stand up to thank the two Secretaries of State, who tonight made a significant contribution to this debate, very sincerely. Since the President does not do so, a Vice-President must do so, Mr. the President.

I would, on behalf of my group...

(Rumor) If you see, I go forward. If those people of the PS think they are going to silence us, then we will talk once!

The [...]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the people of the PS not to try to speak German. The accent is horrible.

( ... ...

Mr. Van den Eynde, both words are deleted.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank Mr. Lano for the figures he presents to us here and that show how under this purple government – Mr. Lano, I can’t do that – the tax contributions we have to pay have increased enormously. These are your numbers, not mine. You are right.

Colleagues, secondly, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that this is paid primarily by Flanders and that the PS can cry about "facho" and "Nazis", but that we are the ones who pay! (The Romanian)

If you can eat a sandwich tomorrow, it’s because we pay. (The Tumult)

I repeat to the people of the PS that if they can sit here and perform a great show, it’s with our money. We pay and they don’t pay at all!

I have heard all sorts of things here.

You are drunk. Mr. Speaker, I have heard all sorts of things called here, such as “ta gueule”, “nazi” and “facho”. These are very intelligent arguments of "la gauche francochone".

Mr. Speaker, what I would like to say here, I would like to entrust to Mr. Lano, because he is a serious person, unlike who sits on my left side. Mr. Lano, do you know what the top point is? The point is that we pay for it in the name of ... Mr. Daems, let Mr. Lano speak. Thoughts are free and the word also, in a democracy. (Tumult) Mr. Speaker, the former People’s Union is getting nervous.

Ladies and gentlemen, let Mr. Van den Eynde speak. He was given the necessary time for this.

Mr. Lano, do you know what the top point is? If I look at your note — I believe you — then we pay in the name of the environment. Speaking of hypocrisy!

Mr. Lano, you recommended us to think for a moment. You have sent us, in the old-fashioned, Catholic terminology, almost to retirement. I would like to insist that you dare to draw the conclusions from what you have said and also from what is said on my left side. If you dare to vote against it, it would be courageous. If you do, Mr. Lano, I welcome you in the circle of the Flemish opposition and those who fight for the independence of Flanders.

Beginning of the vote / Beginning of the vote. Has everyone voted and checked their vote? All the world has voted and verified its vote. End of voting / End of voting. Results of the vote / Results of the vote. (Voting/voting 44) Yes 91 Yes No 44 No Abstentions 3 Abstentions Total 138 Total And consequently, the Chamber adopts the project de loi. The project will be transmitted to the Senate.

Dec. 23, 2004 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, I refer to my written report, which is slightly longer than the previous one, unless, of course, colleagues insist on an oral report. I have prepared it.

No one seems to insist on this.

I had colleague Goris registered as speaker...

I do not think Mr. Goris will speak, Mr. Speaker.