Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 21 décembre 1998 portant création de la "Coopération technique belge" sous la forme d'une société de droit public.
General information ¶
- Submitted by
- PS | SP the Di Rupo government
- Submission date
- Oct. 12, 2012
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Adopted
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- development aid
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld N-VA 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 ¶
Nov. 29, 2012 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
Rapporteur Herman De Croo ⚙
Mr. Speaker, I am poorly known when it is assumed that I will present a twenty-five-page report here. This is a modest but necessary amendment to existing legislation.
The law on the Belgian Technical Cooperation must adapt to the international commitments that our country has taken, including in the Paris Declaration.
Until now, in legislation, we give a monopoly to BTC for the execution of its assignments as a Belgian body. The international context obliges Belgium to adapt and choose the so-called national implementation.
It has been decided to give preference to technical cooperation through the country’s own systems, which in itself is a good idea. That is the modest amendment, which we present here in the House today.
There will be a much more profound change when we submit the entire legislation on development cooperation to the plenary session after the committee phase.
You should keep in mind that BTC retains a number of powers, even if the co-operation it supports passes through the national governments of developing countries. It ⁇ ins control and fulfils the audit functions.
Several members took the floor on the bill. Ms. De Meulemeester agreed with the principle of the draft law, but wished that Parliament would be more involved in the post-factual view of the matter. He submitted an amendment in this regard.
by Mr. Germany, on the other hand, could reconcile with what he called "national execution", but he wanted to know whether countries were damaged by a prior control that could recognize them or not as recipients of our cooperation.
Your rapporteur agreed with Mr de Donnea that there are a number of tools available to follow up on this, including the national annual report on Development Cooperation. The auditor or the Special Evaluator also advised the government and Parliament to adopt a flexible approach. This approach was also shared by the Minister, although Mr. Dallemagne noted that there must be certainty about the risk analysis when giving national implementation to a program granted in Development Cooperation.
Finally, on 13 November, the committee rejected the amendment of the ladies De Meulemeester and Demol and adopted the entire draft law in question with 14 votes in favour and one abstinence.