Proposition 52K1787

Projet de loi portant des dispositions diverses relatives à l'asile et à l'immigration.

General information ¶

Submitted by

CD&V the Van Rompuy government

Submission date

Feb. 3, 2009

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

administrative court foreign national civil procedure illegal migration migration policy use of languages residence permit removal refugee

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V LE PS | SP Open Vld MR

Voted to reject

N-VA VB

Abstained from voting

Groen Vooruit Ecolo LDD FN

Party dissidents ¶

• Luc Sevenhans (VB) voted to adopt.

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 ¶

March 26, 2009 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

There are various rapporteurs. Mrs Pécriaux refers to her written report.

As to my part of the report, I refer to my written report.

The other rapporteurs are Ms. God, Ms. Nyssens, Mr. Perpetually Mr. by Crucke, Mr. Coëme, Mrs. De Bue and Mrs. Pécriaux. I have already said that Ms. Percriaux referred to this in her written report.

Given the diversity of the issues addressed, I also refer to my written report. It is very difficult to do otherwise.

Mr Crucke is not present. This creates a problem.

If you ask him to be present, then that is indeed a problem. Mr. Crucke is nearby. I can ask if he wants to publish a report. Is that your wish?

Mr President Mr. Crucke returns to his written report. He told me just recently.

I note that one of our colleagues has become Madame Blanche. This is very educational, but I find it very strange.

Mr Annemans, you see a problem.

I will explain it to you, because you are a fresh House Chairman. It is always denied that members of the opposition or members of a particular opposition could be rapporteurs. So you shouldn’t be surprised that members of the opposition who sit here behind me are occasionally annoyed about the fact that rapporteurs do not appear who are always eagerly accepted as rapporteurs, but who when it comes to it wash their pants off.

As a new House Chairperson, I take note of your concern.

I will then come to the discussion of the articles of the draft law containing various provisions, but I must give the word first to Mr Lahssaini in the general discussion and then to Mr Vercamer.

President: Colette Burgeon, Second Vice-President

President: Colette Burgeon, Second Vice-President

My speech will focus on the part devoted to the amendment of the Law on Archives of 1955.

I am glad that Ms. Arena and Turtelboom are present because they are both concerned in different ways. I am also happy that Mrs. Laruelle has just arrived because she is interested in the first head on this subject.

The bill in question corresponds in part to the Destexhe-Durant proposal submitted at the end of the previous legislature. My group is therefore pleased to see this project taken over by the majority, thus allowing to advance a long abandoned subject.

This amendment to the 1955 Archives Act is a first response to the challenge posed by modern management of public archives. Indeed, shortened transfer and publicity times will ⁇ enable better archival preservation and ensure that researchers and citizens have more comprehensive and efficient access to information.

This is what flowers are. I do not want to minimize the scope of this project.

However, I take this opportunity to highlight some shortcomings and weaknesses of this project that risk undermining the value of the archives.

We regret that the clarifications made by the State Council regarding the division of powers between the federal state, the Communities and the Regions have not been taken into account. In fact, the State Council has repeatedly advocated the conclusion of a cooperation agreement in order to harmonize the procedures for the supervision, sorting and payment of public archives within their competence and constituting, in the first place, the memory of an administration and, in the second time, a memory of scientific and cultural value.

I have a first question for the Minister who does not listen to me.

What about the fate of the archives whose Communities and Regions are the legal successors? Currently, these are kept in the state archives or by federal administrations. There is an urgent clarification to be made regarding the transfer of these archives.

The second point on which I draw your attention is access to information and privacy protection. Also here, we find that the bill does not respond to the observations of the State Council.

Indeed, as regards access to information, the State Council observes that, since the regulation concerning the communication of documents affects the right to privacy and, in addition, may in principle limit the right of publication of administrative documents, the delegations empowering the King, in Articles 122 and 123 of the draft draft aimed at determining the modalities under which archival documents are communicated or can be consulted, are manifestly too large. Article 32 of the Constitution provides that everyone has the right to consult every administrative document and to receive a copy thereof, except in the cases and conditions fixed by the law, decree or rule referred to in Article 134, in this case an order.

In other words, it is up to the legislator to determine the conditions of access and the exceptions of publicity of administrative acts.

Federal legislation on this subject is ⁇ a reference. However, they are insufficient because it is necessary to take into account the specificities of access to be organized for archives, taking into account the protection of privacy and the right to access information. For example, archives from courts and courts of the judicial order, as well as those of the State Council referred to by Law 1955, are excluded from the scope of federal legislation relating to the right of access to information.

Similarly, the archives concerning the privacy of individuals should be accessible under conditions that we, parliamentarians, will have to fix in accordance with Article 22 of the Constitution.

Therefore, I regret that the bill contains so many significant gaps in respect of fundamental rights and freedoms. This should be addressed by adding a section that, at least, refers to existing legislation or, at best, incorporates the specifics of access to the archives of the jurisdictions containing personal information.

Third, I draw the attention of the Government to the fact that this bill will have significant consequences for the budgets of the Communities and Regions as well as for the archival services of the federal entities. Because this bill clarifies well the competence of the Regions for the archives of the local authorities.

The archives of the 19 municipalities of the Brussels-Capital Region will be paid to the service of the archives of the Brussels-Capital Region. A draft law was voted on March 6 in the Brussels Parliament. It will need to strengthen the staff service and give them the means to properly perform their mission.

Similarly, I imagine that the Walloon legislation on this subject will also be amended to integrate the surveillance of the archives of the local authorities.

Have these elements been discussed between the regions and the communities?

Fourth, I would like to conclude by asking for clarification on the notion of value present in your project justifying the sorting of documents and, consequently, the removal of the majority of public archives. Your project leaves the decision on the matter to the State Archives alone. When you know the means available to them, you can imagine the difficulty in which they find themselves. What criteria will they use to determine the values of documents? The Proof Value? An administrative value? The scientific value? How will the cultural, social, and memorial value of archives be taken into account? No later than today, a colloquium is being held on these issues and the State Archives are deeply concerned about the future of archive conservation. I advocate that the Regions and Communities be involved in these decisions, as they may have an interest in the preservation of certain archives.

There are some ways to respond to the concerns of the State Archives. The first is to give more resources to the Archives to carry out this work. It is not just a matter of money, but also a different orientation of the means at their disposal. Given the building in which these archives are stored, one can easily imagine the degree of energy consumption that one can save by having another place. In this case, the 20 or 30,000 kilometers of archives, which are the subject of concern today, would not be as problematic. Consultation with the Communities and Regions must be carried out urgently, as they will also be able to contribute their share of solutions to this problem.

For several years, a number of ministers have voted in favour of the establishment of a museum of immigration. Per ⁇ the liberals do not endorse this project, but other ministers have proclaimed it out loud for several years. Today Mr. Di Rupo, in "Le Soir", considered that the loss of a part of these archives would harm an important fragment of Belgian social, political and sociological history and that it is important to take this into account.

It is urgent to move from words to deeds and to set up this immigration museum. Our group will soon submit proposals in this direction.

Mrs. Speaker, our group would like to briefly comment on the rules contained in the present draft law on the Volunteer Status.

This bill is a small step forward in favor of the volunteers. While previously there was a flat-rate fee of 1,208 euros per year, or the refund of actual costs incurred with proofs, this proposal allows the flat-rate fee to be cumulated with the travel costs, up to 2,000 km per year, and that not only for travel by car, but also with public transport and for cycling. This extension to public transport and cycling has come upon us, and I must especially thank colleague Becq for this, as she took the lead.

For our group, this step forward is actually not enough, because volunteers are in fact the cement of our society. What these people do is invaluable. Without that group of volunteers, professional help would have to be sought, which would be a very heavy cost for society.

Therefore, we advocate to do more for a specific group of volunteers in the future. Particularly for the volunteers who are active in the emergency care, the urgent medical assistance and the ambulance care, we want to raise the flat fee to 2,500 euros per year. We find this justified, given the specific tasks that the data subjects complete and since they ⁇ do not exceed the professional forces.

We therefore expect that the government will take this into account if it wants to develop a further improvement of that statute.

A second point that we would like to formulate from our group is that, also under the impulse of colleague Becq, a bill was submitted that aimed at granting two and a half days of unpaid leave per month to volunteers who take up a management function in an association. These days are equated in the submitted bill within the framework of the pension buildup. This should prevent people from being forced to take paid leave. After all, many people often do not see the possibility of free hours for taking up management tasks in an association. By allocating two and a half days a month, one can better fulfill a particular commitment as a volunteer manager.

We hope that the government will also take this concern into account when it continues to work on defending the status of volunteers.

Until then, I have a few concerns.