Projet de loi portant assentiment à l'Accord de coopération du 8 octobre 2010 entre l'Etat fédéral et les Régions en vue de l'exécution des règlements des Communautés européennes relatifs à une politique de capacité des flottes communautaires dans la navigation intérieure en vue de promouvoir le transport par voie navigable.
General information ¶
- Submitted by
-
The Senate
- Submission date
- June 17, 2011
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Adopted
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- EC Regulation inland waterway shipping national implementing measure inland waterway transport
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR
- Abstained from voting
- 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 ¶
Oct. 20, 2011 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
Rapporteur Bert Wollants ⚙
I would like to refer to the written report.
President André Flahaut ⚙
There are no inscriptions ... Mijnheer Veys. We will ask, if possible, to register in advance. This allows to move forward.
Tanguy Veys VB ⚙
Mr. Speaker, I apologize for not being registered, but I will also give a brief explanation of our abstinence.
Colleagues, with the present bill, the Secretary of State meets an emergency, but I would like to make a comment. The way in which the Secretary of State, in all his wisdom, has drawn out the structure – I am speaking specifically about the classification and the organization – will also have consequences for the community division in the implementation of the bill. The term goes by itself: the Community Inland Shipping Fleet.
Flanders is responsible for not less than 80 % of the volume generated in Belgium in 2011. Flanders also plays a very important role in the productivity of the Brussels port.
We then listened to the problem of the NMBS. One of the measures to relieve the road network in our country is the promotion of inland navigation. The emphasis that is placed on it is very right. When it comes to decision-making power, I can only note that Flanders, which is, however, in a very large degree responsible for the turnover in the field of inland navigation, have insufficient participation.
Colleagues, I have said so many words in the committee that the Secretary of State in the past has shown a more activist attitude. This is, of course, a slightly loaded term, ⁇ in community agreements. At that time, indeed, the Secretary of State has always insisted that white is white and black is black, whatever the Region said and that he went for an agreement according to his vision. I did not find it again in his motivation. Moreover, now he says that one came to him with that plan and that was it. So who asks, gets.
It is also my role to defend the Flemish interests here. I refer to the proposed relationship. Flanders have insufficient administrative mandates.
A 50/50 scheme, half for Flanders, half for Wallonia and a small role for Brussels.
However, Flanders play the most important role. The generated turnover should also be reflected in the management mandates. Hence my dissatisfaction. They were given too quickly and too easily what they asked. It is based on a distribution from the past, but it was not correct at the time. The seat is in Wallonia for no other reason than a tax. A correction would have been in place. That is why we remember.