Proposition 53K2959

Projet de loi fixant la Liste Civile pour la durée du règne du Roi Philippe.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP the Di Rupo government

Submission date

July 21, 2013

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

head of State

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

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

Voted to reject

N-VA LDD VB

Party dissidents ¶

• Peter Luykx (CD&V) voted to reject.

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. 8, 2013 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

The two rapporteurs, namely Ms Kristien Van Vaerenbergh and Mr. André Frédéric, refer to their written report.

There were several speakers, among them Mr. Lacroix and Van Biesen have already spoken. Mr. President will speak again. Francken, Mrs. Pas and Mrs. Emmery

Mr. President, Mr. Minister, Mr. Secretary of State, colleagues, we have had a long debate on the Civil List in the committee. At one point, you found that my oak was empty.

My oatmeal may be empty, but the oatmeal of the Saxon-Coburg is fuller than ever, and it will ⁇ be after the vote next Thursday.

I would like to go a little deeper into a few points concerning the Civil List.

There is no dispute about the fact that there is a Civil List and that the King and Queen should be given enough money to fulfill their duties as heads of state of this country worthy. For us, the head of state is better than someone who has been elected. That is obvious, but this is not the case in this country and we must learn to live with it. Such is the reality.

There is not much discussion about whether they should get enough money. As far as I am concerned, there is not much discussion about the fact that this amounts to 11.5 million euros, as much as where we ended up. What is important, however, is that the Civil List includes everything and covers all costs. That is exactly the problem. The Civil List is only a fraction of the cost of the monarchy.

In addition to this list, there will be a maximum of 35 employees. There may be fewer, and we will keep that in mind. In addition, there is the security device of 135 officers. You always have it. A president also needs security and travels with a military aircraft, so there’s no difference. In addition, a number of matters will still be paid by the federal state. The heating costs of the Royal Palace in Brussels will be borne by the Regie der Gebäude.

Mr. Verherstraeten, it is good that you are here, because I would like to ask you a question about the fencework of the palaces. There is indeed some discussion on this. You said you answered very clearly. I am apparently a bad performer.

Mr Geens says that everything that has to do with “outside” is funded by the Administration of Buildings. However, it was not quite clear what “outside” exactly meant. Laughs are made about the courtiers and the fencework. I think that is a detail. However, it is about hundreds of thousands of euros. Painting the fence in Laken costs about a hundred thousand euros, which I think makes it relevant.

Everything related to the outdoors, such as the fountains and parks, is paid by the Government of the Buildings. The heating costs of one palace are paid by the Regie der Gebäude, the other not.

What inspired you to do this? Why is there no clarity on the entire line? I wish I had more explanation. After all, I do not believe the story that the cost of the monarchy amounts to 11.5 million euros and 35 employees. I think that cost is much higher.

Given the fact that there is now maximum transparency – says the government – that will be clear in the report that the Court of Auditors will deliver. I also have a question on that. I assume that the report prepared by the Chairman and the First Chairman of the Court of Auditors will be forwarded to Parliament. I expect that members of parliament will be aware of this. Mr Van Biesen has confirmed this here.

However, I doubt that. Why is the report drawn up only by the President and the First President, and not by the General Assembly of the Court of Auditors? If the report is drawn up by the General Assembly, why can it not be delivered to Parliament? In this way, all Members of Parliament will be able to check exactly what is in the drum. I remain behind with a lot of questions.

As far as the tax section is concerned, I am ⁇ sorry for the approach. I repeat my reasoning. In my opinion, the fact that the King and Queen do not pay taxes is unconstitutional. This is not a constitutional custom. It is said that it is a constitutional custom, but I do not think it is. Your predecessor, Minister Vanackere, has invented all kinds of evictions in the committee to exempt the expenses incurred by the grants and the Civil List from excise duties and VAT. I have questioned him about this five times. This is now partly resolved. The indirect taxes should be paid, even if it is not stated in the articles of law itself, but in the memory of explanation, which I find in itself a strange way of working.

On the tax exemption of the Civil List, I would like to read a little bit. I think it is important that it is included in the report. After all, you know that the reports with the discussions on the Civil List last decades.

According to Minister Vanackere, the tax exemption of the Civil List and of the grants is based on Article 89 of the Constitution and on constitutional custom. This reasoning is not correct. Article 89 of the Constitution reads as follows: “The Civil List is established by law for the duration of the government of each King.” The Belgian Constitution, unlike the Dutch Constitution, does not contain a provision exempting the King from taxes. Furthermore, Article 89 applies only to the Civil List and not to the grants. That constitutional article cannot therefore be the basis for the tax exemption of the grants.

A constitutional custom is also not a possible basis. It is unanimously accepted that a constitutional custom cannot precede an explicit constitutional provision. A custom can supplement the Constitution, but not abolish it. A constitutional custom can never be contra constitutionem, but only praeter constitutionem.

Article 173 of the Constitution expressly stipulates that an exemption or reduction of tax can only be introduced by law. A reduction or exemption therefore requires the intervention of Parliament. However, such a law does not exist and still does not exist, nor is it being implemented. The whole story of the exemption from the Civil List is therefore constitutionally non-acceptable. That is where we stay with our point. Then let the amount of the Civil List or 11.5 million euros – a head of state costs money, agreement – be fully included. It is not so. For the first time, 35 staff members are explicitly assigned, at the top of the Civil List.

Third, what is happening here on the fiscal part is an unconstitutional matter. It is not possible for the King to be above other countrymen when it comes to paying taxes. If that is possible, it must be regulated by law, but that law does not exist and is not being submitted today. What is happening is unconstitutional. This is not true, it is completely contrary to the Constitution of this country.

Therefore, dear people, the N-VA will vote against all the proposals submitted today, and ⁇ against the Civil List story.

I give the floor to Mrs. Emmery.

(Intervention outside of the micro)

Sorry to me. Were you not registered to intervene on the draft law on the Civil List? This is a service error. I give the floor to Mrs. No.

In the debates of the latter, and ⁇ in connection with the change of throne, it has been shown that the discussion about the protocolary kingdom is being fully carried out. Today this has been proved once again. All parties in this hemisphere have, either recently or at least a few years ago, all stated that they are willing to support the initiatives that will lead to this. Moreover, the citizens of this country are also convinced that certain acts and powers of the King are completely outdated and archaic.

The regulation in the Netherlands was cited here today. This goes for example. There recently the powers of the King were sharply reduced, including in the field of government formation. What are they doing today? Under the pressure of the crisis and the political opinion, the Civil List is slightly murmured. However, the political role of the King is not affected, even though more than half of the Flamingians would like it, according to the latest polls. Cutting a strip here and there, more shouldn’t be that for a majority of the Flammers. For us, it should not even be that anymore. We don’t need romantic cakes.

As constructive as we are, we want to urgently work in the first phase to limit the royal role and powers in society, as, after all, a majority in Flanders wants. At most, that monarch can play a merely representative, absolutely neutral role that is fully covered by the government.

In a second phase, at least one must fully refine democracy by abolishing inheritance and having the head of state elected democratically. In this gradual context, we believe it deserves to be recommended to work on this issue. As long as there is a royal house in this country, its actions, actions and responsibilities must be embedded in a democratic rule of law of the 21st century.

Despite all the beautiful theories, the Civil List will be approved on Thursday. This is a de facto defeat of the existing system. Fundamentally nothing has changed. The system is treated cosmetically, with some marginal conditions, but ultimately it just remains ⁇ ined. More transparency is promised. From now on, excise duties will be paid on the so-called Civil List, the rich dotation that enables the royal family to cover its costs. However, at a closer glance, these taxes are also just a lean beast. Less than one-third of the Civil List is subject to VAT and taxes. I will ask the tax inspector if I can also get such a preferential rate, but I fear that I already know the answer.

There are many questions still arising in the present draft. These are the same questions that were asked during the previous discussion. I also asked my questions in the committee but received no answer. I will repeat my questions in the hope that I will get those answers now.

Why are, in addition to the very extensive Civil List, 35 more staff members made available to the King? Why are the heating costs of the Royal Palace in Brussels excluded from the Civil List? Why is the external maintenance of the palace in Brussels and the castle in Laken borne by the State? Why is the King not fully subject to personal tax? I have not received any answers to these questions and no responsibility for why this happens.

Mr Van Biesen is no longer present.

The Belgian royal family is not really the fanfare of hunger and thirst, let’s be honest. The personal assets of the royal family are of some level. The historical roots of this family fortune can be traced back to the colonial activities in Congo. The connection of the royal family with the Société Générale and with some foreign banks that discreetly but resolutely defend the interests of the royal family in all major Belgian financial transactions. It is sufficient to say that the first King of the Belgians did not belong to the richest noble families of Europe, and that it took Leopold II to lay the foundation of the fortune of the Saxon-Coburgs.

The basis for the royal fortune lies, as you all know, in Congo and the scandalous way in which it was acquired is a historical given. As long as the Belgian State continues to exist and the head of state remains a king, it will be sufficient for that Belgian State-generated real estate of that royal family to cover the costs associated with the royalty as it exists today.

Unlike our colleagues, we do not agree with 11,5 million euros, colleague Francken. That so-called Civil List had to be reduced to zero because the royal fortune is large enough.

I have very little to add to what I have already said. The number of officials to whom the King may appeal is explicitly specified in the Civil List itself or in the draft law. Previously, this was not the case. There is also a clear deviation from the previous custom of not subjecting the royal house to VAT and excise duties.

I think we have already had a very fruitful discussion with Mr Francken on whether witches are external or internal. At least in my house, Mr. Francken, there are no hooks inside, so I think they are external.

I have nothing to add to what has already been said in the committee.

Mr. Minister, with me there are neither inside nor outside of the gardens. I have no intention in that. I try to be open to everyone and do not need a fence.

All in all, I can say that this proves my point: the Civil List does not cover what many people think it covers, namely the costs of the royal house. Our group shows that there are still a lot of external costs, above the Civil List, which constitute the total financial cost sheet of the royal house. The royal house costs much more than the 11.5 million euros that are often swallowed.

Discussion of Articles