Projet de loi modifiant l'arrêté royal du 1er décembre 1975 portant règlement général sur la police de la circulation routière et de l'usage de la voie publique en vue d'instaurer une limitation de vitesse pour les voies signalées par les signaux F99a, F99b et F99c.
General information ¶
- Authors
-
CD&V
Jef
Van den Bergh
LE Christophe Bastin
MR Valérie De Bue
Open Vld Sabien Lahaye-Battheu
Vooruit Karin Temmerman - Submission date
- June 27, 2013
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Adopted
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- speed control highway code road safety traffic regulations road traffic
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR 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 ¶
Dec. 5, 2013 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
President André Flahaut ⚙
The rapporteur, Mr. Geerts is apologized. He returns to his written report.
Jef Van den Bergh CD&V ⚙
Mr. Speaker, I will briefly explain exactly what it is about. The signs F99a, F99b and F99c mainly indicate agricultural roads or other roads reserved only for pedestrians, cyclists and riders. This does not mean, however, that there are no motor vehicles allowed, for example of landers, residents or persons who must be nearby, vehicles for maintenance, waste collection, surveillance, emergency services and so on.
Today, the road code for those specific roads does not impose a speed limit, which de facto means that one would be allowed to drive 90 kilometers per hour there, leading to crazy situations, such as a limit to 70 kilometers per hour along coastal roads, while on those small agricultural roads one is allowed to drive 90 kilometers per hour. In addition, these roads are widely used by soft road traffic, cyclists and pedestrians, and an adjusted speed is advisable.
Therefore, we want to automatically associate a speed limit to 30 kilometers per hour with the F99a, F99b and F99c traffic signs, similar to pedestrian zones, playgrounds, bicycle streets, residential settlements and the like. In this way, there is also no need to hang additional traffic signs, because there are already enough of them today.
If that speed limit is introduced, we can save road managers, often municipalities in rural areas, a lot of work, and the safety of pedestrians and cyclists is increased.
Tanguy Veys VB ⚙
Mr. Secretary of State, you told me that I would not present myself as a collegial.
For every parliamentary document submitted for discussion in the committee, a reporter is always appointed. Well, I make myself a candidate for that every time, but in the three years that I am a People’s Representative, I have once succeeded in being a reporter of a parliamentary piece. This was under Secretary of State Schouppe. Systematically, another colleague is proposed, even though it has no political value. In the Flemish Parliament, this is easily addressed and it is accepted that some are journalists, while that is obviously a hot item and is very sensitive.
If we find that colleagues who diligently and energetically ask to be reporters do not even make the effort to be present here and report, then I ask who is not collegial here, Mr. Secretary of State? Maybe you can point out that collegiality in your replica, which may not be there. Collegiality must go in both directions. I have never heard you complain about such facts.
I would like to comment on the case itself.
I would like to praise Mr Van den Berghe for his initiative on this subject. I think it is a good thing that such an initiative is taken. This will improve road safety. I think it is important that that speed limit is introduced on roads where such signs apply.
On the one hand, the Flemish government – and ⁇ this makes some French speakers whisper to approve the text – in the absence of an opinion from the Waals Region, which is undoubtedly too busy, has made clear that it is behind the proposal, because it does not lead to additional traffic signs. Given the wild growth of traffic signs, we can surely welcome the proposal.
On the other hand, I still have concerns about the fact that a bill is used to key to a KB. Mr. Secretary of State, we have discussed this in the past. The coincidence meant that during the discussion in the Infrastructure Committee you were probably too busy with all sorts of other activities. You could not be present there. The bill was submitted on 27 June 2013. We discussed it not a month ago, on November 13. So you actually had all the time to come up with a KB yourself, so that we would not have to again measure a KB with a bill.
I asked the representative of your cabinet then why you did not take the initiative on this subject. If we had a reporter here today, that would have already been put into the debate. Now that you are there, Mr. Secretary of State, I would like to hear from you why you have not taken the initiative yourself in all those months that you had to come up with a change to the KB? Thus, you could have avoided that we here with a ⁇ good bill should measure to a KB.
I look forward to your answer.