Proposition 53K0927

Proposition de loi supprimant le statut de chargé de mission particulière auprès de l'Institut belge des services postaux et des télécommunications.

General information ¶

Authors

VB Annick Ponthier, Bruno Valkeniers, Tanguy Veys

Submission date

Dec. 15, 2010

Official page

Visit

Status

Rejected

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

public sector postal and telecommunications services

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

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

Voted to reject

LDD VB

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 ¶

July 19, 2011 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

As you just said, the proposal was rejected by the committee. For more details, refer to the written report.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, I would like to thank Peter Dedecker for his sound report as well as those who assisted him in drawing up this difficult report.

The reason for my speech and my plea to revise the opinion of the committee is to remind the Minister Van Quickenborne concerned of his own words. Not so long ago, he was quite proud that the depolitization of the BIPT, the Belgian Institute for Postal Services and Telecommunications, would be a fact. He boasted that the board of directors would no longer be composed of political creatures, but of persons who are educated and possess the necessary knowledge of affairs. That says a lot about previous figures. Minister Van Quickenborne appears to have done so.

Unfortunately, edoch, under political pressure or because he found it useful and fair, he created the post of special commissioners. What does this task involve? It comes down to the fact that the politically appointed persons who were sitting there at the time are returning to the BIPT by the back door. One of the conditions was: experience with seating in the BIPT. So it is easy. In this way one makes sure that one has outwardly the image of the virgin: one is no longer politically appointed! Meanwhile, through these special commissioners, the political mother-in-law are again created, looking at the fingers of the BIPT.

I think that Minister Van Quickenborne is not set up with mother-in-law, let alone with political mother-in-law. It would be a good thing if we were to get rid of it.

The current legislation gives the opportunity to remove this function. It has been discussed several times in the committee and I have not heard at any time what the added value of the special contractors is, except their political membership card.

Colleagues, their position, by the way, depends on a price mark; those guests do not do it for nothing, they must at least pay their membership card. The BIPT itself notes that it has a shortage of personnel. Therefore, it seems strongly that the special contractors do not mean added value. Recently, the BIPT has complained at a hearing about the shortage of personnel. The telecommunications sector also acknowledges that the BIPT is unable to perform certain tasks. Apparently, there are enough funds to maintain the status of special contractor.

I would like to add the following as a supplement to Mr. Dedecker’s sound report. The Minister for Entrepreneurship and Simplification noted that my group, the Flemish Interest, would have approved the initial regulation on the BIPT. Even a little wet behind my ears, I could neither deny nor confirm. Then I did the necessary search work and I must disappoint the minister concerned. Apparently his explanation in the committee was not correct. He may have made a mistake or it may have been a lapsus. After all, I can hardly imagine that someone from his cabinet has infused him that bad faith. Therefore, here in the plenary session, I would like to refute what the Minister stated in the committee of 14 June on the position of the Flemish Interest in relation to the initial regulation.

I have examined a number of things in the report. Let’s go back in time, to December 13, 2002. Probably it was late when the text was voted and Mr Van Quickenborne was a little tired. When the regulations were approved, not only the Vlaams Belang voted against, but also CD&V. The same CD&V now rejects our proposal in the committee without problems. CD&V itself had criticism at the time on the statute of the special contractors. I quote Roel Deseyn, member of CD&V: “Mr. President, this is an important bill. Unfortunately, we find that it in no way meets the European Commission’s aspirations to create an independent regulator for the telecommunications market. The control mechanism that was installed on the PS’s control and in which the minister retains too much grip on the telecommunications market is in no way in line with what Europe imposes on us.”

If even CD&V says that, who are we to do it better than CD&V? Therefore, we found it important to pay attention to this again. Maybe we will see the light tomorrow, maybe Minister Van Quickenborne has prepared his dossier or so that we can still approve the proposed proposal.