Proposition 53K0983

Proposition de loi modifiant la loi du 5 août 1992 sur la fonction de police en ce qui concerne le contrôle de l'absentéisme scolaire.

General information ¶

Authors

VB Guy D'haeseleer, Filip De Man, Peter Logghe, Annick Ponthier, Tanguy Veys

Submission date

Jan. 4, 2011

Official page

Visit

Status

Rejected

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

family benefit teaching police compulsory education

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

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

Voted to reject

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 ¶

May 29, 2013 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

I refer to the written report.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, the Flemish Interest Group has submitted a bill amending the law of 5 August 1992 on the police office, in particular, as regards the control that the police should perform in our eyes regarding school failure. Today, however, I come here to express my regret for the fact that the other parties, although they gave us some equality, have refused to approve the proposal in all respects as to the motives for the proposal.

I can refer to one of your party partners, Mr. President, namely the Brussels Prime Minister-President Vervoort. He spoke about the gigantic problem in Brussels, where tens of thousands of young people walk around without any future or at least without a socially responsible future. The Prime Minister did not say that simply. He said that because many of these young people have not obtained a diploma, do not know a second language and therefore hardly have a chance on the labour market.

If you do not have opportunities in the labour market, you know about what is happening. In the least bad case, one ends up in the unemployment statistics, one must beg for a living wage or, worse, one enters more or less into the criminal sector of black work, drug deals and much worse. In recent times, many of these young people convert to fanatical Islam and thus bring out matters that have been discussed here many times in the last weeks and months.

So we had the good idea – that officials had already some colleagues from other parties – to force youth criminals, immorals and no-future youths more or less to walk the normal path. Youth crime in Brussels, as well as in other major cities, and even more frequently in smaller cities, must urgently be stopped.

One of the reasons is indeed the spotting. When one falls away from the social path, it comes, among other things, through spotting. Many studies show that there is a link between the rise in crime and spoofing. So, in our eyes, it is necessary to keep young people out of the streets and provide them with a certain future and perspective through education.

If not, they get trapped in the web of gangs and, worse, salafists and the like. Furthermore, we believe that teachers and even parents or educators are not always or even difficult at power to control whether or not the presence of young people in schools is justified. Therefore, we advocate with the bill to give the police services the power to control the school pipe.

I see it also in my city: young people, teenagers who are obliged to go to school and a little lustless walking around the city center and there or not things that should not actually see the light. This is due again to the failure of this school obligation. This correlation between crime and bullying has been proven.

We therefore want to give sufficiently competent police officers the right and duty to draw up a process-verbal of unjustified absence. That process-verbal would then be forwarded, after a first warning, to a child allowance fund, which then can take the necessary measures, because child allowance can of course only be paid if one fulfils his school obligation.

During the debate in the committee, which I myself could not attend due to obligations in the committee for the Land Defense, a few speakers from other parties also spoke. Mr. Bart Somers of Open Vld said that the bill indeed calls into question a serious social problem and that society indeed should be concerned about young people who constantly spit. He pointed out that their future prospects, as I said before, are heavily mortgaged, that they will not get a degree, that they will not have opportunities on the labour market. That is all true. And then suddenly Mr. Somers said that the bill is not a good tool, because we must ensure an integrated and inclusive approach, only the word sustainable was missing yet, which is nevertheless fierce in fashion, involving the field of education, parents, the preventive sector and, if necessary, the police.

It is typical for the Open Vld that it tries to pick up a grain on the right side but then, when it comes to it, the left thesis applies. Idem for CD&V by monde of Mrs. Slegers. She says that there is indeed a problem of spawning. She also supports the integrated approach. This problem has existed for many years. I look forward to the integrated approach of all those parties who have been in the government for years, both in the Flemish and in the federal.

Meanwhile, Ms. Slegers liked to distance itself from the bill because the sanctioning of violations of the school duty is a regionalized matter. The police in this country are not federalized. We can therefore find it difficult to submit legislative proposals to give the police assignments in the Flemish Parliament. That is a strange reasoning of CD&V, ⁇ intended to not have to speak too loudly about the substance of this proposal.

It is a pity that this is not accepted. We hope for light in the darkness. Hopefully, some will still realize that spibbles need to be tackled harder than ever because it is one of the main causes of the big problems with our young people in the big cities and increasingly also in the provincial cities.