Proposition 53K0355

Projet de loi visant à supprimer les limites relatives à l'âge de l'enfant handicapé en matière de congé parental.

General information ¶

Authors

MR David Clarinval, Valérie De Bue, Denis Ducarme, Jacqueline Galant

Submission date

Oct. 12, 2010

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

work disabled person parental leave

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

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

Party dissidents ¶

• Steven Vandeput (N-VA) 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 ¶

March 17, 2011 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

I am referring to the written report. I will be speaking soon in the discussion.

This bill is about the abolition of the limitations on the age of a disabled child on parental leave.

The bill requires very few words. The simple act it enters speaks book parts. The increase of the permissible age to 21 years when parents want to take their right to parental leave for their disabled child is obvious. Disabled children are still in need of assistance. Therefore, it makes sense that parents are given the opportunity to take their leave later, when it best suits them and the child. This should be possible until the child becomes legal majority.

We are in favour of a general increase of the age to 16 years for all children regarding the inclusion of parental leave, but this additional increase to 21 years for disabled children is independent of our global proposal.

This measure is in line with the urgently necessary flexibility of the inclusion of parental leave for disabled children. This is a simple procedure, which helps many people without additional costs. The target group is not extended and the duration of the leave remains the same. Only the period within which the leave may be taken will be changed.

We are pleased that the National Council for Persons with Disabilities unanimously advised positively on the legislative amendment. It is surprising to me that there was also a breaking loop to change the duration of parental leave and the interruption allowance. The Council speaks of a missed opportunity. However, the Council will know that a thorough evaluation of the promises is underway, or should be underway.

An isolated measure would really not be in place. Furthermore, there is a demand for the integration of such a political choice in the overall budgetary picture.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker. We hope that the change in the period within which parental leave for disabled children can be included will be a prelude to a general change, more specifically for children up to 16 years.

We are very pleased with this proposal.

Mr. Speaker, as Ms. De Block reminded in a few words, in our society, conciliating work and family life is not always easy. Nevertheless, this is primary. It is necessary that each worker can modulate and adapt the course of his career according to events and the evolution of his private life. It is also important that the proper organization of work is not disturbed within the company. It is for this purpose that the parental leave policy has been developed.

The interest of parental leave lies in the fact that it allows the parent who decides to take some time for the education of his children to keep a foot in the professional sphere and not interrupt his career. Today, the right to parental leave can be exercised until the child is twelve years old. For children with disabilities, the 1997 Royal Decree stipulates that parental leave can also be taken until the child reaches the age of twelve. This age limit for children with disabilities is completely arbitrary and makes no sense.

Indeed, more than another child, the disabled child needs attention, a presence for his care and stimuli that take more time for his parents. These attentions may correspond to moments of life or quite particular treatments that do not correspond to those of a so-called “normal” child. Medical treatment and the needs of children with disabilities may require greater parental presence at an older age. Parents should therefore be allowed to take their parental leave later.

It is to address this problem that the MR group, through its deputies Ms. De Bue et Galant, Mr. Ducarme and also myself, filed the bill No. 355 which is very simple: it aims to fix to 21 years the limit age for taking parental leave when the child is recognized as disabled. This proposal meets a significant need of families without incurring costs for the Belgian State. This observation is important.

I would like to thank the members of the Social Affairs Committee who have welcomed this proposal on all banks of this Assembly. I would like to thank the President of the Commission in particular. I promised it, I kept my word, after thanking everyone! Indeed, the president has put all his weight to allow this law to be voted.

The needs vary from family to family. Some need to take time when children are small, others when they are teenagers, and sometimes even when they are older. A minimum of flexibility must therefore be of rigour in this matter in order to take into account the reality of each family. This is especially important when the child is a disabled person. That is why the bill under consideration constitutes an advance in that it takes into account the reality of families of children with disabilities, the difficulties they encounter daily. But, of course, further advances in this area will still be indispensable in the future.

Mrs De Block analyzed the opinion given by the National Higher Council of Persons with Disabilities. The vacancies are now the subject of an analysis of the National Labour Council.

That said, one cannot not support the opinion given by the National Higher Council of Persons with Disabilities and not take into account the realities, the daily lives of the latter who will still have to be supported in the future.

Mr. Speaker, this bill, like others in the Social Affairs Committee, aims to improve the condition of people who are facing several difficulties, in this case children with disabilities, and who must be able to continue to lead, parallel to this, a working life.

We are busy examining in the Social Affairs Committee a whole series of proposals that look at specific leave related to situations of pregnant women, children with disabilities and other co-parent situations, etc. It seemed clear to us that this bill was going in the right direction. The burden of a disabled child is a ⁇ heavy burden. Parents in this situation should be able to respond positively and as effectively as possible, without fear for their employment, without fear for their occupational situation.

That is why we wanted to support Mr. President’s bill. Clarinval and Mrs. De Bue. We have worked in this direction in committee and without earrings. When a proposal is submitted and it is relevant, we must support it. This is what I wanted to do as president. The other groups followed. It was the wisest in relation to this necessity. I would like to thank the authors of the proposal and all the groups for supporting this proposal.