Proposition 51K1429

Projet de loi visant à restructurer des obligations légales de pension de Brussels International Airport Company et de Belgocontrol.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP MR Open Vld Vooruit Purple Ⅰ

Submission date

Nov. 5, 2004

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

air transport public sector pension scheme survivor's benefit

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Vooruit PS | SP Open Vld N-VA MR FN VB

Voted to reject

Ecolo LE

Abstained from voting

CD&V

Party dissidents ¶

• Gerolf Annemans (VB) abstained from voting.
• Hagen Goyvaerts (VB) 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 ¶

Nov. 18, 2004 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Since there is no written report yet, oral reporting is the minimum. With the utmost respect for the work of this Parliament, the Committee on Infrastructure, Traffic and Public Companies on 10 and 17 November discussed the draft law concerning the restructuring of the pension obligations of Brussels International Airport Company and of Belgocontrol. Their

The Minister stated that the proposed bill aims to organize the pension schemes of the staff of BIAC and Belgocontrol differently in the context of a debt restructuring. Currently, both companies are responsible for the payment of the statutory pension of their employees. This obligation, which does not rest on other undertakings, could seriously hamper business operation in the future, as the undertakings will de facto increasingly have to operate in a competitive environment. For example, pension obligations can cause a significant disadvantage.

BIAC, a public company whose government owns only a third, cannot unilaterally increase the landing rights and must compete with neighboring airports. Their

Belgocontrol should not operate in the true sense of the word in a system of free competition. It is primarily the responsibility of the air traffic police. However, the European regulation introduces an element of competition. The regulation of flights over Belgium is no longer a monopoly of Belgocontrol. Sometimes one could think so. It does not appear to be so. Companies in other countries will also be given the opportunity to acquire a market share for flights over Belgium. We are not always aware of this, but this is shown in practice. Their

Through the acquisition of the pension obligations by the Belgian State, Belgocontrol, a small enterprise that today bears a significant pension burden, up to 56% of the income, will have the opportunity to lower its unit rates, its unit rates to the level of the neighbouring countries and thus eliminate its competitive disability.

In concrete terms, the draft law authorising the government to decide that the statutory pension obligations of BIAC and Belgocontrol will be taken over by the government and that companies for the payments of pensions of their staff from 2005 to the RSZ must pay a fixed contribution to the wages of their employees, 7.5% employer contribution and 13.5% employee contribution. Their

The value of the pension funds of both companies amounts to approximately 130 million euros each. That is an amount that is not so high for the government, but that for the companies with relatively little staff, it is about about 700 people at BIAC and about 400 at Belgocontrol, still constitutes a considerable burden. The adjustment will be included in the new management agreements that the government will conclude with the companies.

Two opposition speakers held the debate in the committee during the first discussion, namely Mr Damien Yzerbyt of the CDH and me. I would like to summarize the comments of colleague Yzerbyt. He found it unheard of that after the saga of the transfer of the pension fund of Belgacom, the same method is now applied to the pension funds of BIAC and Belgocontrol through an authorization law. At least he opposed a similar approach. I myself deeply regretted that such a swift settlement was imposed in Parliament. The objectives of the draft can ⁇ be supported, especially the safeguarding of competitiveness and the preservation or creation of jobs in the already severely affected aviation sector. We must admit this. Nevertheless, it was desirable to get a little more clarity about some concrete aspects of the draft law.

I confronted the Minister with this and asked him the following questions. Does the draft frame the agreements with the Christmas-fresh private shareholders of BIAC? How long will the fixed contributions, which companies will have to pay from 2005? Can the Minister provide insight into the evolution of the pension obligations incurred by the government and the contributions that companies will have to pay in the coming decades? Their

Colleagues, I think it was not insignificant in this discussion to focus on the repayment ratio and the internal long-term profitability of the operation. It was very difficult to get some insight into it just a few moments before the start of the committee and to find out whether the government, which has now become the minority shareholder of BIAC, has sufficient instruments to ensure the correct fulfillment of this company’s long-term obligations. It was also not unthinkable that the European institutions, in particular the European Commission, would object to the proposed reform, which could sometimes be regarded as a violation of the EU Treaty competition rules.

According to the State Council opinion on the preliminary draft, the opinion of the Financial Inspectorate and the agreement of the Minister of Budget were not regularly obtained. It is possible to ask whether the Minister has solved this procedural problem? In which fiscal year will this income be registered? We also wonder whether the money will be used for the reduction of state debt. The entry into force, which was stipulated in Article 6 of the preliminary draft, no longer occurs in the final draft law. The Minister responded that the draft law would come into force immediately after ratification in accordance with the specified deadlines.

The Minister clarifies that the employer and employee contributions to be paid by the companies have been the subject of negotiation, will be fixed in a royal decree and then must be ratified by law within a period of nine months. The removal of pension obligations fits in a wider whole. For BIAC, the acquisition fits into a debt restructuring operation. Hence the urgent nature of the bill: it must be completed by 1 January 2005. For Belgocontrol, certain aspects of the acquisition need to be clarified. The current management contract on this subject will expire soon. Their

As for the approval of the operation by the European Commission, this will not be a problem for BIAC, says the minister. The acquisition of the pension fund of Belgacom, a similar operation, was accepted without problems. For Belgocontrol, however, the story is slightly different. This is not a problem in any case, as the company is formally not subject to the European competition rules. However, we must note that there is de facto competition from regulatory authorities from other countries. The Minister had lost sight of the fact that in his capacity as Minister of Budget he had to approve the draft he had submitted in his capacity as Minister of Public Enterprises and this, Mr. Mr. President, explains the delay in the opinion of the Financial Inspectorate and the agreement of the Minister of Budget. Their

The proceeds of the operation are not currently included in the 2004 or 2005 budgets. I emphasize “for now”. Unlike the sale of BIAC, worth €325 million, which was used for debt reduction and ended up in the Silver Fund, the proceeds will be included in the current budget at the time of payment. Before the entry into force, the government has finally opted for the common law arrangement, as stated ten days after its publication in the Belgian Staatsblad. Their

In the article-by-article discussion and voting, the vital result was that Articles 1 to 5 were adopted without further discussion with 12 to 1 votes. Furthermore, I must point out that in the meantime some technical changes have been made, which are more about typographical corrections or translation corrections. Their

Mr. Speaker, if you allow me, I would like to add another personal comment to this report. We could find ourselves with CD&V somewhat in the arguments of the minister, where the main aspect of employment was of a decisive nature. However, I would like to add that by the acquisition of the pension obligations by the Belgian State Belgocontrol, a small undertaking with a significant pension burden, it will have the opportunity to lower its unit rates to the level of the neighbouring countries and thus eliminate its competitive disability. That is important. As far as BIAC is concerned, I think that stability in the light of the partnership that has been entered into is also an important element. In other words, CD&V endorses the objectives, but has to make some critical comments. Their

CDH colleagues have also expressed concern that such an operation is sometimes not entirely budget-orthodox. A parallel was drawn with the Belgacom Pension Fund.

For the attention of younger colleagues, when there is no written report, one should give a verbal verbal report. I would like to thank Mr Deseyn for his comprehensive report.

Mr. Speaker, dear colleagues, the CDH will not endorse the bill to restructure the statutory pension obligations of Brussels International Airport Company and Belgocontrol.

First, we denounce the method used by the government. This is an operation for which you inform the Parliament in an incomplete manner, while you require de facto, from that same Parliament, special powers to modify all the legal provisions processing the transfer.

Then, on the recourse to special powers, the State Council does not fail to emphasize that the authorization of the King of special powers to carry out this operation is imprecise on many points. The same remarks at the level of a series of reasonable observations of the State Council on clarifications to be made to the text and which are not taken into account.

Finally, the government recognizes taking advantage of the good health of one of its companies to balance its own budget. It seems fundamental that we should have been informed of certain opinions, including that of the Court of Auditors, that of the Financial Inspector and the opinion of other committees such as Finance or Economic Affairs. Few figures have been given in the committee. No actuarial table has been submitted concerning the cost of state fund retrieval, the estimated cost of pension services currently provided by the fund and the cost-benefit ratio for the state finances.

This method appears expeditive, this is not surprising because this type of operation, which is discussed in this bill, will no longer be allowed in the future.

In addition to the method, let us also break in the substance some of the government’s claims on this operation. No, the recovery of the pension fund is not in the interest of the staff. What worries us above all in this case is the little concern of the coalition for future generations and for the payment in general of future pensions following the abandonment of a capitalization logic in favor of a distribution logic.

Also, the recovery of the pension fund is not a budget hole for the state. What is most fundamentally hidden in this operation is extremely worrying. There is no shadow of doubt that this incorporation by the State is a negative operation in the long term as for Belgacom. The recovery of the pension fund is a one-shot operation that does not offer a credible response to the structural deficit caused by these bonds. This operation gives the illusion of a budgetary balance while the state will bear the indefinite financial burden of the service of these pensions for many years. Clearly, this recovery is one of the too many budgetary tricks and threads developed by the government and this, failing to have been able to agree politically on structural mechanisms of debt reduction as the Supreme Council of Finance continues to advise.

This operation is an artwork. It gives an image of the public deficit that is not consistent with the economic reality. Per ⁇ the government is counting again and again on other "tricks and threads" to guarantee BIAC and Belgocontrol workers the payment of their pension at a time when we all have to face the consequences of the aging population.

Yes, the recovery of the pension fund is a disguised form of public aid. With the force of pretending all the way that this operation is an abomination, one would end up forgetting, Mr. Minister, that in all this great budgetary setting, there is still one unknown: Europe. The latter will again have to provide an opinion on this transaction and we cannot prejudice that this opinion will go in the same direction as that given for the pension fund of Belgacom. The situation is not the same no matter what you think. The sale of a part of the state capital has already been decided. The buyer is known. Nowadays, you change the dot of the bride afterwards. Or then the dot was known, but not of everyone!

In conclusion, let us think that this is neither more nor less a budgetary artifice. This project is not really based on socio-economic reasons. It is based solely on short-term budgetary policy motives and even — we dare to say — very short-term. The current government is relieved, but it puts an additional burden on future governments given the expected demographic aging between 2010 and 2030.

Mr. Speaker, I have no problem with the content of the bill, but rather with the explanation given by the Minister in the committee, which shows that the proceeds from the sale of the pension fund will be accounted for in the current budget. I do not think that this can be done because, in contrast to these incomes, there are also pension obligations. Their

I can therefore only conclude that the events surrounding the pension file of Belgacom are repeated. The benefits are now consumed and the burdens are shifted to the future. I will also refer to this bill.

Per ⁇ your abstinence applies to your group?

This applies to a number of people in my group.