Proposition 53K3352

Projet de loi portant des dispositions concernant la mobilité.

General information ¶

Authors

CD&V Jef Van den Bergh
LE Christophe Bastin
MR Valérie De Bue
Open Vld Sabien Lahaye-Battheu
PS | SP Linda Musin
Vooruit David Geerts

Submission date

Feb. 11, 2014

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

combined transport air traffic transport and mobility rail transport road transport

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

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

Abstained from voting

LDD 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 ¶

April 22, 2014 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Véronique Bonni, the rapporteur, refers to her written report.

It is a real dialogue between two people.

Mr. Secretary of State, on the one hand, it is of course a good thing that a regulation that had proven useful until a few years ago and was abrogated for wrong reasons or suspended – as it turns out now – is now being reactivated, allowing the combined rail and distributed freight transport to be subsidized again.

We regularly read in all sorts of policy notes that more should be invested in rail and inland waterway transport in order to ease road transport burden. Of course, the message should go hand in hand with promoting and supporting these modes of transport. We all know that for sure, when it comes to distributed and combined transportation, the big barrier is, of course, its price mark. It is very expensive to effectively assemble rail transport from various angles. Therefore, the federal government has always successfully supported it financially.

I have already pointed out in the past that I regret, on the one hand, your conduct as Secretary of State and, on the other hand, the closure of the system. In fact, the argument that one had to save to cut in the subsidy of combined and distributed rail transport was abused. That was a wrong decision, even badly, because the decision also had financial consequences. I refer to NMBS Logistics, which is still in a precarious financial situation. That company had already had to dismiss a number of tasks, as it concluded that they were no longer financially viable.

If you, as a Secretary of State, want to invest in rail and water transport, there must also be an effort to counter this. Especially for the period from June 2013 to the end of 2013 the federal government has remained in failure in this regard.

The second point is the uncertainty. We see this also in many other matters, such as taxation or the economic initiatives supported by the government. Here too, one is primarily demanding party for security and stability. I regret that the subsidy scheme, depending on your negotiating margin within the government or your willingness to renew or not extend certain subsidy schemes, has actually happened on the cap of the combined and distributed freight transport by rail.

If there is a sector that needs stability and security, then it is. We are talking about contracts that port companies must conclude with certain importers guaranteeing a certain price. That is not possible with a price that changes from today to tomorrow. No, one wants to contract a price for the next two years with a supplier of raw materials or containers. With the uncertain factor of the subsidies, the market is unnecessarily disturbed.

The industry, some ports in Wallonia, but especially the Flemish ports, bear the consequences of this. Therefore, it is no coincidence that you may have closed the subsidy crane more easily. In any case, I think this policy has been ⁇ nefarious. I have already referred to NMBS Logistics. Secondly, I refer to the emergency cries of various ports. They were faced with the reduction of subsidies which again made it much less interesting to use rail transport.

Our roads are full and we are no longer able to allow additional tonnages. All sorts of formulas are invented, such as a road vignet, a kilometer tax and more. What signals do you send as Secretary of State? You are seriously deficient.

An additional burden on road transport, by even more trucks chasing our roads, will ⁇ not benefit road safety.

Not only from an economic concern, but also in relation to the state-owned company NMBS Logistics and road safety, you have failed three times as Secretary of State.

I think the present proposal may be a step in the right direction, but we also lack a response to the need for long-term certainty. We are only talking about an extension until 31 December 2014. I think the commitment should have gone much further.

We hope that the next government will no longer count such a whispering secretary of state, but a secretary of state who will keep up with such support.