Proposition 51K2496

Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 3 juillet 2005 relative aux droits des volontaires.

General information ¶

Authors

CD&V Greta D'hondt
Ecolo Muriel Gerkens
LE Benoît Drèze
MR Pierrette Cahay-André
Open Vld Maggie De Block
PS | SP Jean-Marc Delizée
Vooruit Annelies Storms, Greet Van Gool

Submission date

May 18, 2006

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

unpaid work social security voluntary work

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 ¶

June 8, 2006 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, Mr. Colleagues, the bill amending the 2005 Law on the Rights of Volunteers was examined by the Social Affairs Committee on 24 and 31 May 2006 and was voted unanimously. by

This bill, initiated by our colleague Ms. van Gool and co-signed by most democratic parties, aimed to make changes to the 2005 law, to improve it, taking into account the demands of different sectors and various instances.

I can only congratulate for the work done in many months and already under the previous legislature, both the working groups and the Commission; many reflections have been made and many amendments have been submitted. by

My political group welcomes this initiative aimed at avoiding practical problems and guaranteeing legal certainty, as the lead author of the proposal recalled during committee discussions.

I refer to the written report as regards technical and legal considerations, which have been the subject of discussion and consultation but, beyond that, I would like to highlight some points that I find essential.

As a committee, on the basis of the proposal co-signed by most democratic parties, we tried as much as possible to clarify certain concepts such as, for example, the notion of association of volunteers which was imprecise in the previous bill.

Then we replaced the initially planned organization note with an obligation to inform volunteers on the part of the association, leaving the latter the care to choose the way, the vector allowing to disseminate information relating to insurance, rights and obligations, etc. by

In addition, we have been attentive in committee to the recommendations of the sector, notably the Higher Volunteer Council, the National Labour Council and the insurance sector. It was decided to balance the responsibility of the association over that which currently prevails in matters of labour law. by

What was important was to guarantee the most extensive coverage possible for volunteers, by reconciling the different responsibilities (associations, volunteers) by obliging the associations to take insurance and to keep the family responsibility of common law as a possible shelter. Otherwise, the responsibility of the administrators would be engaged. by

The right for volunteers to be informed and the obligation to inform have often been mentioned. We also emphasized the need to distinguish the status of the volunteer from the labour legislation. Given all the changes made as a result of the discussions and amendments, the explanation of the reasons of the bill proposal may no longer be very appropriate.

I must also draw the attention of my colleagues on the problem of the entry into force of the law. We have made sure that it can intervene as quickly as possible. by

In conclusion, the various interventions were constructive and were the subject of broad consensus. Different ministerial cabinets have been associated with the work and have been able to contribute. The work sought to address various technical and legal problems by bringing improvements to the law and aiming to meet the aspirations of the associations, wishing to meet the demands of the people of the field.

There have already been registered speakers: Mrs. D'Hondt, M. Delizée, Mrs. De Block, Mrs. Van Gool, Mrs. Gerkens, Mrs. Storms, Mrs. Cahay.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, Ladies and Gentlemen, practise! I hope we are there this time. Their

What I really know is that, through the discussion and the long path that the Volunteer Statute has taken, you become strong in respect. From respect for volunteers you become not only strong, but iron-strong. Your commitment to the status of volunteers has proved to be a titanic work over the past few years. No routine work, but a lot of timber and cutting work. It is especially with two feet firmly planted in the reality of volunteer work. The lesson we’ve all learned together is that when you don’t have a foot in the reality of this volunteer work, you actually make a law that may be full of good intentions, but that doesn’t answer the questions, needs and needs on the ground. You may think it right, but also hug someone of love: that was what we were actually trying with the volunteer work. Fortunately, we were brought to order on the ground. Their

Over the last few weeks and months there has been a constant in the work, though it is not the text of the law, because we are today to another version. The constant over the past months and years has been the commitment and involvement of the many volunteer associations that our country is rich. Large domes, small associations, local organizations, individual volunteers, social associations, associations active around sport, culture, nature, youth, whatever in the construction of society: at certain times it seemed as if every volunteer in this country wanted to have his contribution in the creation of this law. Their concern was not wrong: politics indeed threatened to create a statute that was alien to volunteers. It is also never bad that we as politicians dare to acknowledge that at some point we cycle backwards rather than forward. Their

I think several colleagues will repeat this afternoon: it is with great pleasure that CD&V, together with other parties involved in this statute, would like to thank the volunteers from the whole heart for their efforts. Every day they dedicate themselves to their specialty, namely, to receive people, to bring children, to take care of the sick, to guide young people, to give hands and feet to ideals. Their

Thankfully we still have so many hands and feet, heads and hearts, who still dare to work for ideals in this society.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, colleagues, today is also a good time to thank them for something in which they have become strong in recent weeks and months, namely in legislative work. I think our volunteer organizations have swallowed more legislative provisions in recent months than they love. Their contribution through mail, telephone and personal contacts is something — I think other colleagues can witness that too — something that one as a member of parliament rarely experiences when writing a law. Sometimes one was worried if one opened the mailbox in the evening to see how angry one would be or how many questions there would be today to indicate that one was not doing the right thing. Sometimes there was a thirty-seventh question, while in the whole box there were only answers to thirty questions. This will remain the fate of all of us in the coming weeks and months.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, Colleagues, I think we can all say together that this new law is a progress and even a great progress compared to the previous one. In important areas, such as the organization note, the law was more aligned with what is common and practicable in the field. Typical of this law is that there will always be questions about the application of the law to certain practical cases. I experienced this last night, when I went to give explanations in a municipality. I came back with a number of questions that I could not answer, with the best will of the world not. So I could do nothing but what I have said regularly over the past few months, namely that I would note it and try to find an answer to it.

Mr. Minister, first and foremost the new arrangement must now be communicated to the volunteers and their organizations. I think all of us are aware that a simple mention in the Belgian Official Gazette will not be enough. We therefore ask the government to make its commitment to good communication about this law a reality. There is a need, Mr. Minister, for a broad and solid information campaign, not an information campaign for the benefit of politics but for the benefit of volunteer work. On Tuesday, before the final vote in the committee, we have also asked the staff to make an attempt by today — I hope, Mr. Minister, that you will have an answer to that later — to set out the main lines of the information campaign that the government will initiate by way of speech from tomorrow. The time is short before the law comes into force. Our associations of organizations, especially those that have the most activities in the summer period, have at this time something different to plan and organize their activities than to provide information about this statute.

Mr. Minister, I just said what I experienced until last night. That will be a matter for the coming days and weeks. Once the information provision begins, I think people will ask themselves more questions than we can answer. For this reason, it is important that the debate after today’s vote does not stand still. The government and Parliament should remain available to answer volunteers’ questions. In a cabinet that does the coordination, it would be better to install an anchor point, a contact point where associations and volunteers can end up with their questions.

After approximately two years, a review of the legislation will need to be made to see whether it needs to be updated.

I dare to say that we now have a better and more applicable law, but not yet a perfect law. Let us acknowledge that. We have indeed arranged the definition of volunteer work, but for the application of the law it remains important that a number of matters are defined very clearly. In other words, do they fall under the application of the law or not?

During the discussions in the committee, we have already clarified a number of them. For example, anyone who practices sports in a sports club is not a volunteer. A spectator or a participant in a cultural event is not a volunteer. Anyone who organizes an activity is of course a volunteer. Until then, it seems clear to all of us. In the coming months and years, there will still be questions about clear delimitation and specific cases. Can I give an example from the speech stand, which may be a political example? Take someone who is attending a meeting of a party department. I think we will all say that this person is not a volunteer. However, if that person joins the party program, then he makes an additional contribution and then the question arises whether or not he is a volunteer. In the coming weeks and months we will be confronted with such issues.

Mr. Minister, colleagues, we are of course very pleased with the replacement of the organizational note by an information obligation. Compared to the previous version of the law, it means a substantial administrative simplification. If, with all our good intentions, we were losing our pedals or threatening to lose our sense of the terrain, then it was indeed with the construction of the organizational note. The present text assures volunteers that they have the right to be informed about their organization: its objectives and activities, insurance and fees, whether or not paid out. However, it is very important that the organization itself can choose the form in which it complies with the information obligation.

The mountain of paper that we would have created with that organizational note could possibly have produced the greatest piece of paper ever. I think the youth movements, which are quite strong in paperwork, did not really need that, so fortunately we abolished it.

The liability scheme also retains in its present form an element that was very important to us, namely the immunity of the volunteer for damage caused by his minor error. We really wanted to show respect for volunteer work. The volunteers, who make a possible mistake in their voluntary effort, should not be held responsible for this with their possessions and possessions. Thus, we have taken a very important step. We are very pleased that immunity is regulated for the damage done by the volunteer by a minor mistake.

A Flemish proverb says there can be a lot of regret in a bag before it is full. However, we regret that insurance today is not available for all volunteers. Therefore, we ask that after two years at least before that point we examine where we stand. The experiences will probably make us wiser.

We continue to regret the distinction now made between, on the one hand, the organized volunteer life with the legal persons, the actual associations with personnel and the divisions of those two and, on the other hand, the unorganized volunteer life with all other actual associations, because the first is and the second is not covered by the liability insurance.

One question that we think could not be sufficiently clarified in the discussion in the committee is what exactly is a department of a larger organization. That is why we continue to live today with the term "specific connectivity". Also in that regard, I think that experience will have to teach us or that is clear enough for the definition of a department. My first quick experiences with explaining the texts, have taught me that I still had to do some effort to get that translated for the base.

We are very pleased that the issue related to the liability of directors and associations was resolved after a thorough discussion in the committee. In short, for managers of legal entities, the managers’ liability applies insofar as they perform administrative acts. If they do volunteer work, they fall under the application of the liability of the volunteers. For directors — we do not call them, of course, so — of actual associations employing staff or which are not a branch of such an association or of legal entities, only the voluntary responsibility applies, including for administrative acts. For the directors of factual associations who do not employ staff and who are not a branch of an association or a legal entity, neither the management liability nor the liability under the Volunteer Act applies, but the common law liability.

Each of us will acknowledge that insurance was one of the crucial reasons why we committed ourselves to come up with a status for the volunteer. We are pleased that it is now aligned with the new liability scheme.

However, as I just said, not all volunteers are insured by an organization’s policy. It is therefore very good that the text explicitly states that the family policy cannot exclude voluntary work. We know that this was threatened from on the ground during the discussions of this law. It is therefore very important that this is explicitly stated in the law.

It is not unthinkable that volunteers are not insured. This is one of the weak points of this legislation, of this statute. In fact, we have not been able to get everyone insured. In fact, the fear was too great that, if we wanted to have insured up to the last volunteer, we would have created a system too logged and ⁇ also unpaid for the people involved. I hope we can come back to this when we have learned from one or two years of experience.

Regarding the role of municipalities and provinces, at some point we were confronted with the proposal that municipalities and provinces should check whether the organizations would fulfill their insurance and similar obligations. CD&V opposed this very strongly and this proposal was fortunately not included in the law. After all, it is precisely the municipalities that should support the organizations of volunteers and the volunteers and not control them. We were very willing to say that the municipalities and the provinces have a task – not to say a duty – to inform the volunteers and their organizations, but imposing the control task on the municipalities was more than a step too far. Fortunately, we were able to stop that.

Regarding insurance and collective policy, we are pleased that the representative of the Minister has said that it is in no way intended to establish a mastodont unique policy that must be accepted by all volunteers and all organizations of volunteers, until the termination of the current insurance. This, by the way, is very explicitly stated in the report and I thank the rapporteur and the services for this. The government will design a substantial model policy and agree with the insurance sector a price that can and will be requested for that insurance.

In this way, we prove a service to the volunteers and the organizations. After all, we give them a model policy with all mandatory provisions and the price against which they can insure themselves on the market.

One point remains open, in particular the application of the Labour Law We regret that the members have not been able to find the arrangement, as we had proposed them. There was too much fear that she could have worked certain abuses in hand or at least complicated the control of abuses. Their

Mr. Minister, I ended up in the middle of your shop. I am very pleased that you are here this afternoon. After all, as the law is still labelled, the labour law applies to volunteers, except for the points for which the King provides for exceptions.

We had proposed that the labour law would not apply, except for cases for which the King considers that the labour law is applicable. That would be, for example, when the welfare of the volunteer could be jeopardized.

We were told that our proposal could not be implemented, because then the social inspection would no longer be able to act.

Mr. Minister, therefore I have given in the committee a number of examples, on which the united delegates of the government and of the various ministers have repeated each time that the labour law was not applicable in those cases.

Mr. Minister, I repeat three examples, because I would like you to confirm in your response at this plenary session that the Labour Act does not apply to these examples.

For example, the children of the chiro who sell marsepein or waffles at home do not engage in child labour. This must also be clear. The youth movement, which organizes a night drop in its summer camp, does not do night work. A playground activity which holds its summer feast, which begins at 6 o’clock in the morning with the setting up of the tent and, in the following night at 5 o’clock, attempts, still holding its legs straight, to bring the cash into security, does not exceed the working time nor the law on the rest periods.

That must be very clear; otherwise we are doing something that makes voluntary work and commitment impossible, not least in youth movements and in sports groups.

Volunteering is not just getting tired. Volunteering can and should be ⁇ .

With the approval of the final text, I hope that volunteers with a calmer mood than before, not plagued by administrative burden and bureaucracy, and without having the dwarf on the body that an inspector can come to check whether they are performing night or child labour, can continue their volunteer work.

After this very solid effort, I wish all our volunteers a very virtuous holiday, but above all a very good status.

Mr. Lano, would you like to interrupt Mrs. D'Hondt or sign up for the general discussion.

Mr. Speaker, I did not want to interrupt Mrs. D'Hondt. Justine Henin won the first set with 6-3. Meanwhile, Kim leads in the second set.

With a bit of irony, I say: this was Mr. Lano, our reporter on the spot.

( ... ...

It will definitely be a Belgian who will win this semi-final. That makes everyone virtuous. The [...]

The following speakers registered for the debate: Mr Delizée, Mrs De Block, Mrs Cahay-André, Mrs Storms, Mrs Gerkens, Mrs Van Gool and Mr Drèze.

Mr. Speaker, after the excellent report of Mrs. Van Lombeek, who recalled the essential lines of this new bill, after the thorough intervention of Mrs. D'hondt, of which I have no sentence to withdraw — in any case, I am speaking of today's speech — and before the interventions of other colleagues, among which the final intervention of Mrs. van Gool — "de spil waar alles om draait" —, I think I can be brief.

I would like to remind you that the year 2001 was probably a trigger in this matter. This year is the International Year of Volunteering. A conference was held here at the end of the year. The Parliament, by the voice of some of its members, has had the will to focus on examining a series of bills to recognize the world of volunteering and, on the other hand, grant it rights.

Since this period, we have seen a lot of enthusiasm, motivation, generosity in the head of some people who resulted in the almost unanimous vote last year on a bill, even though we could be frustrated by the fact that it took a lot of time to finalize the debates.

One may have sinned by excessive enthusiasm; one wanted to do too well; one wanted — as I said in commission — to go too fast, too far, too high, and one may not have taken the measure of the complexity of matter. The Volunteer Rights File is a complex file covering several subjects: social law, tax law, labour law and the difficult issues of insurance and liability. Furthermore, all these important advances must be put into practice and translated into resolutions, with a corollary, Mr. Minister, a question that arises, and then the answer to that question that brings another question or subquestion. We did not measure this element.

The entry into force of the law has been postponed and the new law adjusts the previous one. As Ms. D'Hondt said, this new law seems to me better correspond to the reality of the field. It better addresses the problems that could arise. For example, I cite the flexibility in the manner in which information is given, the limitation of the scope of the law on compulsory insurance, the withdrawal of small de facto associations with the nuances mentioned by Mrs D'Hondt, the search for greater legal certainty for volunteers and for associations, the clarification as to the non-application of the labor right to voluntary work or even the removal of the quarterly ceiling.

I would just like to make three comments.

First, it is important and urgent that this law comes into force as planned, on 1 August next year. Mrs D'Hondt began her speech by saying "Oh!". I also think we are in time. There is still possible evocation by the Senate and the publication of the arrests, but we know that they are almost ready.

Madame D'Hondt, I think our calendar stands the way for the law to come into force. Nevertheless, I insist on the ministers and in particular on the ministers of social affairs, that the administrations have done the work because we are currently somewhat between two chairs. In fact, information was given about the current law, I even want to say "the old law". Therefore, social and other allocators felt that from February 1, the rules were changing, which was not the case.

I would also like to emphasize that the world of volunteers, volunteering, is a formidable vector of social ties and social integration. This is an important point!

Secondly, as regards information through the communes, our group welcomes that no additional charges have been given to the communes in this regard, but we insist on Minister Verwilghen to make available, in the appropriate forms and in the shortest possible time, the material necessary for this information. It has to be anticipated; it affects a lot of people and it will take time for this information to reach the volunteers themselves.

We must take into account the deadlines. In the case of insurance, the deadline is fixed on 1 January 2007. We must not rest on our laurels. We must arrive on time and on time.

Third, this law regulates the situation of basic volunteers but does not meet all situations. There is still work to be done, especially the grey zone issue, which is an extremely difficult topic that we will still have to address in the near future.

Together with my group, I am delighted that we are reaching this adjustment, this amendment of the law. It seems to me necessary. It does not question the basic philosophy of law; it only makes it more applicable. Madame D'Hondt, it is with the same enthusiasm that we will approve this bill.

Mr. Drèze, Mrs. Van Gool would like to be the last. You will speak right before her.

I am delighted that we have reached the final vote. Eventually it began in 1999. We have seen Mrs. De Meyer being replaced by Mrs. Van Gool, because she has become one of our colleagues. In 1999 we started meeting. We knew it would be a giant work, but fortunately we didn’t know it would be so much work, otherwise we might have gotten scared.

It is indeed a complex problem. After the adoption of the law of 3 July 2005, it soon became apparent that yet a certain refinement, not to say improvement, had to be made to the law. We were delighted that many organizations forwarded notes and that we received many emails. Indeed, Mrs. D'Hondt, it was sometimes a little frightening to open our mailbox, but it was always constructive comments, notes and messages to alert us to certain specific cases. We all have learned from experience and lessons.

The volunteer should be protected as much as possible. This proved unanimous. However, when the insurance cost table came to light, it soon became apparent that many small organizations and associations were afraid of falling out of the boat. It was therefore said that we must find a system that is realistic and that, on the one hand, takes into account the coverage of the volunteers in case of damage and, on the other hand, the financial feasibility for the organizations and associations. We could always call on the employee of the Cabinet of Minister Verwilghen to find a solution.

Therefore, a compromise was found. After a long and extensive discussion, it seemed fair. The solution of the collective policy, to which Ms. D'Hondt has already referred, was found. We must, however, add that we must be careful that this collective policy can be crushed in time. It should enter into force on 1 January 2007.

The administrative simplification was also implemented in cooperation with the Cabinet of State Secretary Van Quickenborne. The information obligation becomes much simpler and more realistic, and the removal of the quarter limit will no longer bring the people who do, for example, playground activity, into the trouble. These were all positive solutions.

With regard to the application of the labour law, we had initially also adopted the original position, but there were problems with the labour inspection. Therefore, a different path was chosen. I find it normal that Mrs D'Hondt asks the Minister for some further clarification in this regard before the report. He has done so in the committee. I think, however, that the labor inspectorate has other work to do than assault the scouts in their night camp and ask who set up the tent there at 6 o’clock in the morning.

Mrs. D'Hondt, of course you have much more experience in the field than I do, because I have unfortunately never been to the scouts. I find it normal that she asks for clarification and that she can let those many children and cook mothers and cook fathers leave the camp with a calm heart. As far as I am concerned, they can leave much more calmly than before, because now they have gained something. In the past, there was no law that gave them rights.

The last point I would like to point out is the problem of job seekers. We wanted to give a signal from the beginning. Mr. Drèze will probably come back to this later. We are committed to allowing unemployed people to volunteer. However, we believe that they should remain available to the labour market at all times. I also think it is important for them that they do not fall into a trap of volunteering, which prevents them from entering the labour market. We think it is useful for them to gain work experience, but we want to be careful that they cannot become surrogate jobs.

Mr Drèze, therefore, this week in the committee I have opposed your most recent amendment, unless you submit it again to remove a provision in an article relating to the unemployed.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, colleagues, the VLD is pleased that we have succeeded in reaching such a large consensus on the rights of volunteers. The work is not yet finished. Mrs D’Hondt has already pointed out this. There is still a lot of communication needed and a lot of questions will arise in the field. After the vote, even more attention will need to be paid to proper communication and as simple information as possible to the attention of the associations.

There will be a lot of questions, Mrs. D'Hondt. If I am not mistaken, you have asked two new questions in the committee this week, including about the accompaniment of sick people traveling to Lourdes. None of them had an answer to that. I hope you have already answered this question in the meantime. I repeat, there will remain a lot of questions.

The bill was approved in the committee. It is done. For our group, however, there is another work on the shelf. There are still many statutes that have not been resolved. I think of the status of the emergency workers in the ambulance services. It will also be a difficult exercise. We have already made an attempt in this regard during the previous legislature.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to call on my colleagues to use the free time – we will have plenty of free time in the coming weeks because the proposal on volunteering is behind – to start a new thought-out on this issue. There must always be a challenge!

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, dear colleagues, as already mentioned, the text submitted to us today tends to clarify several provisions of the law of 3 July 2005 on the rights of volunteers in order to address some practical problems arising after its adoption and to better take into account the realities of the field. by

It is indisputable that parliamentary work was started – Ms. De Block recalled that it was in 1999 – with the desire to better take into account the reality of the field, to frame, to protect the volunteers active in our regions, volunteers who weave the web of associative life and create an indisputable social link.

However, it turned out that some provisions did not correspond to the reality of the field. Thus, the organization note as it was envisaged was at the origin of a real administrative overload for our associations. In addition, it posed many practical difficulties even though the objective — and it is praiseworthy — was to ensure that the volunteer is informed about the organization, its objective, possible insurance, its compensations, etc. The removal of this organization note was a gesture expected by the sector. by

The bill also introduces amendments to the articles of the law which concern – as has already been said – the obligation of insurance. From the beginning, we talked about the fact that it was very dangerous to require an insurance obligation for all associations. We were ⁇ concerned with the problem of small de facto associations. These can be formed without formality and for periods sometimes very limited. We thought, at the time, of a small barbecue between neighbors; this kind of initiative cannot be subject to too many conditions. In addition, it is sometimes not easy to prove its existence, nor to define criteria for recognizing a factual association.

We therefore reintroduce here, for very informal small de facto associations, the current regime of common law liability. In this context, the volunteer continues to repair his own fault by using his own assets or the coverage offered by his family insurance. This type of association is therefore no longer subject to an obligation of insurance. We found it appropriate to remove this insurance obligation for highly informal factual associations. On the other hand, there will remain in the law an obligation of insurance for ASBLs and factual associations that employ personnel, such as youth movements, and which are defined in Article 3, 3°.

However, we make certain reservations regarding the proposed definition, its concrete application and the control of this insurance obligation.

This proposal aims to improve the legal situation of volunteers. However, its application on the field may require re-opening the debate later for further refinements and/or new modifications in order to better take into account this reality of the field. The law will probably do, like others elsewhere, its youth disease.

Finally, I would like to pay tribute to all the volunteers whose commitment and dedication is no longer to be demonstrated.

Here are, briefly, the various remarks and reflections I wanted to bring in this debate.

We will, of course, vote on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, the establishment of a good arrangement for the volunteers had a lot of feet in the ground. After extensive discussion of the system for volunteers had already been held in the previous legislation – I was not there at the time – a law on the rights of volunteers was finally passed last year. In fact, we were all satisfied with this. The initiators of the original bill have always had the intention of protecting the position of the volunteer as best as possible. The underlying motivation has always been very simple: people who commit themselves uninterestingly for other people, for the society, or for the good purpose, should be able to do so without being harmed by it. Voluntary action should not be punished.

Although the approved law was always drafted with good intentions, the new system for volunteers has still caused a lot of criticism among various volunteer organizations. Criticism does not always have to be received negatively. This is what the initiators of the present bill have done. We all listened carefully to the comments from the volunteer sector. Since it has always been our intention to develop a good, functional arrangement for the volunteers and their organizations, there is now a bill for which a transition has been made beyond the party boundaries. It also reflects on the aspirations of the workplace.

For spirit, there have always been two points of importance in regulating the rights of volunteers. On the one hand, the scheme should protect the volunteers optimally, but on the other hand, the scheme should not hinder the rich associative life in our country. The proposed amendments and the draft law comply with this. By the way, I will not go deeper into those changes, my colleague of the sp.a, Mrs. van Gool, will do so. In that respect, I totally agree with her.

I would like to point out two things that are important for us in the further implementation of the law. First, there should be a comprehensive information campaign about that law on the rights of volunteers. The bill expressly stipulates that municipalities and provinces must inform organizations about the insurance obligation. However, I urge our government to take the necessary initiatives to make the law public. In the committee, commitments have been made to "promote" the law on the portal site of the federal government. I think a booklet would also be in place here. It is therefore essential that the associations have the right information because the law is not so easy to explain. I also think that all fellow parliamentarians who have contributed to the creation of this law will take on their duty to make this law known to the volunteers and organizations. I hope that the government, which has made a clear commitment in the committee, will effectively fulfill its commitment.

A second point that is important for us in the further implementation of the law is the development of a model policy. The bill provides that associations are offered the possibility to register on a collective policy. For us, this should really be a good tool for the associations to insure themselves in a solid but inexpensive way. The representative of the Minister of Economy has already clarified in the committee that there are two options for this: either to work with a public procurement, or to establish a kind of model policy. Their

We clearly opt for the second option. Our Flemish Minister of Youth and Culture has already received a lot of questions about the arrangement for the volunteers and he has together with his Flemish colleague of Welzijn by the Flemish Volunteer Work Support Point conducted a study on insurance and volunteer work. From that study, there was a clear demand for a model content for an insurance policy. It is sometimes quite impossible for associations to compare policies with each other. There is a lot of uncertainty about different concepts. We therefore urge the Minister of Economy to work on such a model policy development in the discussions with the insurers. In addition, we were very pleased to hear in the committee of the representative of the Minister of Economy that work will be done in this direction. Their

Colleagues, the creation of the Volunteer Act may not always have gone smoothly: we can confidently admit that. The arrangement that now prevails may really be there: it is adapted to the reality and meets the desires on the ground. The Spirit will therefore with great pleasure approve the bill.

Mr. Lano, it is 6-3 and 6-2. Mme Henin a battu Mme Clijsters. In terms of information.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, I share the opinion of my colleagues when they started their speeches with “Oh!”, “Finally!”, “We are delighted!” I also look forward to the completion of these texts. Now we can expect the law to enter into force, for the most part, by 1st August next year, provided that all ministers fulfill their obligations. The mobilization of the latter leads me to think that they will continue to get involved so that we can fulfill our commitments.

The difficulties we have encountered force us, on the one hand, to be vigilant and constantly evaluate this work and its involvement by adapting the texts according to what will come back to us from the field; on the other hand, they force us to maintain a constant contact with this sector, both by the representatives of the volunteers and by the representatives of the associations that collaborate with volunteers.

I perceive the concern of these associations despite the changes, despite a better definition of the volunteer, despite a better definition of the de facto association, despite the replacement of the organization note by an obligation of information. Obviously, they do not yet know how far we will get the last texts to study. They also fear that these changes will result in additional obligations for them and will be costly. We therefore have the duty to inform them and to keep in touch in order to reassure them and to avoid encountering resistance, born of difficulties encountered in the past, but not now justified.

We need to resume our work in a path dating from the previous legislature. At the time, what appeared was the demand for the recognition of volunteers and an organization like the National Volunteer Council. On the French-speaking side, there was no request for the status of the volunteer, on the contrary, on the part of the Flemish actors.

Given our exclusive legislation, in particular the provisions on unemployment or access to integration income, actors in the field of citizenship — which is not limited to work — and in the social connection were at risk of being excluded from replacement rights and income because of their involvement in volunteer activities. It is therefore up to us to be vigilant and to avoid that the statute that we have drawn up becomes in turn exclusive as a result of difficulties that we would not take into account.

We postponed the entry into force of the provisions on insurance to January 2007. I consider this measure reasonable given the complexity of the provisions and our goal of guaranteeing maximum immunity, protection, without crushing the associations of obligations and unbearable costs to guarantee these insurance.

I especially appreciate the proposal that was made of this collective insurance organized through the state, the municipalities and provinces being associated in the information mission. From my discussions with the associations, it emerges that they really have a positive appreciation of the approach, because they have the impression that they do not have to assume the complexity of a responsibility and a risk coverage but that they can resort to a measure that is known to be well done, this without having to take over it completely.

This bill is the result of a long process. However, it is not the outcome of the work to be done. There are still not many points to study. I hope that we will be able to remain attentive to the echoes of the field, as we have been so far.

Mr. Speaker, in the committee, I had thanked my colleagues for taking the effort to associate me with the work despite the difficulties posed by the time and the limitation of the skills. In fact, unfortunately, the less a political fraction is important, the less resources it has in parliament. I rested a lot on the lawyers of other groups and volunteer associations who helped me work on this project. I would like to thank them again today, as well as the representatives of associations and volunteers who have continuously provided us with information based on reality as well as technical and legal information.

I will not be too long either.

It would be greatly appreciated, Mr. Dresden!

I will begin my speech with a small preamble and then I will emphasize four elements.

First of all, I would like to thank my excellent colleagues from all the Democratic parties of the Social Affairs Committee for the quality and pleasant work we have done together, as well as Mrs. van Gool and Mrs. D'Hondt for their contribution to the final touch of the last straight line. I will go on to the small avatars of the last day that are not very important, insofar as they can be settled — Mr. Minister, I hope — in a moment.

That being said, my first point concerns the definition in Article 3 that the work in committee has really helped to clarify. My question was, in any case in the French wording, about the beginning of the definition in Article 3, where it is said that it must be understood by volunteering: "any activity exercised without remuneration or obligation".

The term “no obligation” has made some lawyers “shake up”. It is clear, for the whole committee, that this formulation has in particular the aim of not assimilating the mandatory internships of certain students within certain organizations but that our intention was in no way to target the administrators of ASBL, for example. We have all agreed, these are to be considered as volunteers and can benefit from the benefits of the law of 3 July 2005, which we amend today. We also all agree that this assessment in relation to administrators does not make, by induced effect, mandatory administrator RC insurance.

We also agree to exclude from the scope of the law, merely participants in the activities of an organization. Thus, persons whose activity is similar to a provision of services consisting in contributing within the organization to its functioning and, therefore, to the realization of its social objective are concerned, while those whose activity consists in participating in the activities organized by the organization as a hobby, without otherwise investing in the operation of the organization are excluded. We have repeatedly mentioned the case of a football player who is not to be considered as a volunteer when he plays a match as an amateur to defuse himself but who can be if, at the time of the halftime, he helps hold the buvette. This is a very clear example.

The second point is very short and relates to Article 12 of the Act, which says the following about the compensations provided for in Chapter VII: "The King may, by decree deliberated in the Council of Ministers, raise the amounts provided for in Article 10 for certain categories of volunteers under the conditions that He determines." On the part of non-governmental organizations active abroad in particular, we have been pointed out that, in the current state of affairs, in certain sectors, compensations greater than those provided in Article 10 are applicable with the agreement of the competent authorities. In order to fully comply and to avoid any legal discussion, the situation shall be regulated by means of one or more royal decrees deliberated in Council of Ministers according to article 12 of the law.

The third point concerns Article 13, which constitutes a plus for the unemployed and pre-pensioned in that, before that law, they had to wait for the agreement of the ONEM before performing a volunteer activity, which poses problems for one-time activities. By this article 13, we wanted to allow the unemployed or pre-pensioned to be considered as a volunteer as soon as he has sent his application to the ONEM. There remained the possibility of an equivocation in paragraph 3 of Article 13 where it is said: "In the absence of a decision within two weeks from the receipt of a complete declaration, the exercise of the unpaid activity with retention of benefits is considered accepted. Any decision on prohibition or limitation taken after the expiration of that period shall have consequences only for the future unless the said activity was not carried out on graceful grounds.

It should be noted that our will is not to force the unemployed person to postpone the start of the exercise of his volunteer activities to the expiry of a period of two weeks beyond which he could exercise his volunteer work without the risk of losing his benefits. To remove any ambiguity, it would have been easier to remove the words "taken after the expiry of this deadline", as the Minister's representative had proposed. by

Since the committee considered that the administrative practice was such and that it should not be changed at the last minute, improvising through my amendment, I removed it on the condition that the cabinet, and in particular the minister, can assure me that the draft royal decree would go in the same direction. Mr. Minister, I would like to thank your cabinet for having, as agreed, sent through the secretariat of the commission the royal decree in project.

The new proposed article 45bis, paragraph 2, first last paragraph, of the Royal Decree of 25 November 1991 on regulation of unemployment stipulates: "At the absence of a decision within the period of twelve working days following the receipt of a complete declaration, the exercise of the unpaid activity with maintenance of benefits is considered accepted. Any decision including a prohibition or limitation, taken outside of this deadline, has only future consequences unless the activity was remunerated." Therefore, Mr. Minister, we would be fully reassured if you agree to amend your draft royal decree by removing the words "taken outside of this deadline". In this way, we would not be obliged to submit our amendment again here in the plenary session.

I now make my last comment on Article 13.

The French text should not be interpreted as allowing the unemployed person not to retain his benefits, in the event of a negative decision, only if the activity is not compensated within the meaning of Articles 10 to 12 of the Law of 3 July 2005. The text speaks well of an unpaid activity, i.e. not assimilable to a professional activity. On this level, Mr. Minister, your draft royal decree is clearer than the law of 3 July.

My last point is the entry into force of the law. Remember that, a few months ago, the postponement of this entry into force from 1 February to 1 August 2006 had caused a lot of emotion. You told the government that you were reporting once, but not two. On my initiative, we have nevertheless agreed in a committee to postpone Articles 5, 6 and 8bis concerning liability and insurance to enable, on the one hand, Minister Verwilghen to make arrangements with his head rested and, on the other hand, the sector to react; Mrs D'hondt and I have repeatedly stressed this. We therefore hope that all the arrests — so-called social or insurance arrests — will be taken early enough so that the sector can turn around within a reasonable time.

Mrs. van Gool, you are the chief proponent of the bill, along with your other colleagues. So you close the list of speakers in the general discussion. Then I will close the afternoon meeting, which ends a little longer than expected. However, this is not a problem.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, Mr. Minister, this is the third time today that we are discussing a bill on the status of volunteers in the plenary session. The proverb says, “Third time goodbye.” hopefully the same applies to the volunteers.

I would like to make two comments.

First, if we want to develop a regulation in the Parliament that gives good protection to volunteers and gives them the status that they have been asking for so long and to which they also really have the right, it must be a good regulation. We, politicians, must have the sense of responsibility and the courage to make the adjustments that are necessary, and to implement them.

We must not forget that when we approved the bill here in 2005 and thus introduced the statutory status for the volunteer, we have done innovative work. After all, in addition to the statute of the worker — worker and servant — the statute of the self-employed, the statute of the artist and the statute of the recipient, we finally had a statute of the volunteer.

Ms. D'Hondt has already said that in Belgium it is about one and a half million active volunteers. This is an important and large group. They are active in various sectors. These are individuals who are active as volunteers sporadically, ⁇ only once or twice a year, or almost daily. It is a very large and very diverse group. It is therefore not so abnormal that it took some time before we could develop a legal arrangement. It was also not so abnormal that, once the legal arrangement was approved, adjustments were still needed.

This has already been said by colleagues, and this may not be the last time we are talking about the status of the volunteer here in Parliament. Hopefully this will not happen again in the current legislature. We are all talking about this sometimes.

However, it is precisely because it is such an innovative work that we did then that an evaluation of the law will be necessary. The law also expressly states that an evaluation will be made, among other things, of the amounts and the amount of the cost compensation.

Other provisions of the law may need to be evaluated later, and further upgrades may be needed later.

Alleszins – I would like to emphasize that – the bill that is voted today does not actually alter the fundamental principles of the law of 3 July 2005. However, we make a number of adjustments, with which we adjust the provisions of the law to the reality of small associations, often actual temporary associations. This will allow the law to be better aligned with practice.

I want to overcome those adjustments.

The first point concerns the scope and definitions. Nothing actually changes, except that we include a definition in the law of "factual association". A factual association is a concept that legally does not actually exist. In order to make all this a little more clear, it seemed appropriate for us, therefore, to define better or more clearly in the law what we mean by a factual association.

The second, important adjustment, concerns the organizational note. Mr. Speaker, colleagues, you may remember that the Youth Council has come here, in the plenary session, to protest against this organizational note. In fact, it was a bit of a pity, because it had not been necessary at all. Of the information contained in the organization note, it has always been intended that it could be delivered by the association to the volunteer in a smooth, simple way. Unfortunately, the term organization noota has started to lead a life of its own. At some point it was even stated that it must be signed, which, however, was never stipulated in the law. Because of that fact and the load of the notion of organisatienota, it seemed appropriate for us to remove the term carrément from the law. We have simply replaced this term by "information obligation".

The association must inform the volunteer about a number of things, but how the association does it is form-free. It can be a letter, which can be signed, but it can also be through a website, a membership sheet, a signboard or an outboard in the local where the activity continues. It is also up to the association to determine how it will deliver that information to the volunteer, but the burden of proof rests on the association.

The third point relates to the system of liability and insurance. Even here, we do not actually change anything fundamental to the principles of the law and the original intention of the legislator, namely a maximum protection of the volunteer. Such maximum protection can only be achieved by introducing a liability scheme similar to that between employers and employees. This means that if there is damage caused by the volunteer then the organization is liable with immunity for the volunteer. This is linked to an insurance obligation which requires the organization to enter into a civil liability insurance. This is the best protection for volunteers.

However, we must also be realistic. We may only impose such obligations on associations who are aware of those provisions and who are aware of the responsibility which rests on them. This is ⁇ not a problem for structured associations such as VZWs or local governments. However, it is a problem for smaller, actual associations that only occasionally or even only once organize an activity. If we impose the liability scheme, analogous to Article 18 of the Employment Contract Act, and the insurance obligation on such associations, then we actually shift the liability of the volunteer if that damage causes to the volunteer who organizes the activities. A number of associations have also denounced this imbalance between types of volunteers.

Therefore, we place that arrangement of liability in the organization and the insurance obligation, which is the best protection for the volunteer, limited to a number of associations. For the smaller actual association, the current regulation shall continue to apply. That is, the common law applies and they may eventually fall back on their family policy if they have entered into such a policy.

There are two issues related to liability and insurance. First, and colleague Storms has just cited it, information about it is very important. Therefore, the law imposes an information obligation on the municipal governments and the provinces. As local governments, they are often best placed and come into contact with local associations first. However, the federal government will also conduct an information campaign, including through the federal website.

Second, the law indeed imposes an insurance obligation. However, as a federal legislator, we want to assume our responsibility by offering a collective policy from the federal government. Thus, we offer maximum protection with a good arrangement for the majority of volunteers, while taking into account the reality of the small associations. We also provide the necessary information.

The fourth point concerns the cost reimbursement. You know that the essential feature of volunteering is that it is an unpaid activity. Therefore, there is no payment for this. A reimbursement for incurred costs can, of course, be. There are two systems for this. Either one proves what costs one has incurred and those real costs are reimbursed by the association, or there is a flat-rate system where almost no evidence needs to be submitted.

In that flat-rate system, we had three boundaries built into the law: a day limit, a quarter limit and a year limit. Especially the quarterly limit caused problems in a number of sectors. I am especially concerned with the field of play.

I am therefore pleased — it is an important simplification — that we have abolished the quarter limit in the law, so that there is only one day limit and one year limit.

The fifth and final point concerns the entry into force of the law. Collega Drèze has already said it and I am also very pleased that we continue to maintain the entry into force on 1 August 2006. Indeed, many articles in the law constitute a significant improvement and create greater legal certainty and an important protection for volunteers. It is therefore essential that those provisions can enter into force on 1 August. There is no reason to postpone those provisions. The various competent ministers have done their job. The various royal decrees are ready and can therefore also be known in time.

The liability and insurance scheme, Articles 5, 6 and 8bis of the Act, will not enter into force until 1 January 2007, which is actually not so bad and which is also logical, because we must give time, for example, to the federal government to establish the necessary contacts with the insurance sector, if the federal government wants to offer such a policy.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleagues for having succeeded, across party boundaries and across majority and opposition, in working together on the arrangement and the bill we will adopt today, and thus implementing a number of corrections and adjustments to the law on volunteers.

I would also like to express my very express thanks to the services of the House, both the legislative secretariat, the secretariat of the committee, and ⁇ also the legal service, for helping us to make a legally correct text, in a very short term.

I would also like to thank the High Council for Volunteers, the many volunteers, the many associations and the overarching organizations, because they, with their constructive criticism and their cooperation, contributed to the text of the bill, as it is here today. I am convinced that we now have a good and workable arrangement, which allows us to provide volunteers and associations with greater legal certainty and clarity and give them the good protection they rightly deserve.

The list of speakers is exhausted. Minister Vanvelthoven has the word.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, I would like to thank you for the presentations in the plenary session and in particular for the work in the committee. I think there is unanimity when I say that this law is in any case a better law and a good arrangement for the volunteers and provides them with more legal certainty and protection.

I would like to respond briefly to the questions that were asked.

Mr Drèze spoke about the situation of the unemployed and the bridge retirees. I do not think it is necessary to change the law on this subject. I understand that this has already been discussed in the committee. Today we have sufficient legal capabilities to enforce the law as it is intended. Currently, by the way, it is the case that recoveries are made only by the RVA, if the RVA can prove that it is a paid activity. I would like to confirm that the KB that will implement Article 13 will be drawn up in that sense.

Mrs D'Hondt spoke a moment about the application of the Labour Law. However, I would like to remind you that the High Council for Volunteers itself has requested the removal of that article 9, § 1 . Most abuses, by the way, are established after complaints from volunteers themselves. It is therefore important that the inspection will be able to continue to control in the future, especially for those exceptional cases where there is serious abuse.

You have given examples of the waffle sale, the night droppings, and so on. I would like to emphasize here that it is not intended to inspect volunteer organisations, which clearly do not carry out purely commercial activities and which pursue a social purpose. This is undoubtedly the case for the vast majority of youth movements.

On the other hand, I would like to say — you may agree with me — that we should maintain the ability to combat or prevent abuses in some semi-commercial sectors. The inspection has an important assessment power, which ensures that only the serious abuses are combated. Some colleagues have intervened on the communication that will now have to start. First and foremost, the media already pay much attention to the changes to the Volunteer Act. This is a first important element. Secondly, civil society organisations are ready, after the passing of the law, to move on to communicate with their members. The government will help them with all possible means. Third, the information and communication by the municipalities is prepared today by all relevant ministerial services in good cooperation with each other. All existing information networks will be used, both the portal sites and the websites of the relevant departments and those of the High Council for Volunteers. In addition, we contact the King Boudewijnstichting to create a brochure. Their

I conclude by saying that I agree with the colleagues who have said that it may be necessary to evaluate the new law within this and two years and to see to what extent it meets the concerns we want to address today.