Proposition 54K1277

Proposition de résolution relative à la qualité des services postaux.

General information ¶

Authors

CD&V Roel Deseyn, Nahima Lanjri, Jef Van den Bergh, Veli Yüksel

Submission date

July 16, 2015

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

quality standard resolution of parliament postal service universal service

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V Vooruit LE PS | SP DéFI ∉ Open Vld N-VA MR PP

Voted to reject

Groen Ecolo

Abstained from voting

PVDA | PTB 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 ¶

July 17, 2018 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

I am referring to my written report. This has its own qualities, even though it was not done with Mr. by Devin.

We would have voted on this bill with the greatest enthusiasm. When you read it, you are for it. However, this text highlights hypocrisy. It shows what we want and what the government is doing. Mr. Van den Bergh, you laugh at yourself! When I read it, I thought I was going to vote for it.

I will make a few considerations on the various points. The first point of this resolution aims to continue to prioritize customers in postal policy, and to pay attention to consumers and small ⁇ . We wonder how the removal of red boxes is an added value for customers. As clearly recalled by the N-VA in commission, the only true obsession of the government is to push the course of action up.

In point 2, we are told to ensure the quality of postal services and to improve it on a timely basis by formulating clear objectives and result obligations. It will be recalled that the management contract adopted under this government does not require a numbered reduction of the environmental impact of bpost, but a maintenance at a certain maximum level. For comparison, the management contract concluded by Minister Labille required a 35% reduction in CO2 emissions.

In paragraph 3, it is requested to ensure that shipments relating to family events are distributed on time. We are asked to send the letters on time. I ask myself today this question: what means are given today to bpost to ensure this very specific mission?

It should ensure that prices are affordable, cost-based, non-discriminatory and transparent, so that no one is excluded from the postal market. Very good resolution! Such a request goes directly contrary to what was voted here even here a few months ago. The IBPT had written black on white the consequences of this law: "The price of the stamp will fly away. It will be even less controlled than before and even less cost-based." Worse, Minister De Croo supported the recent announcement by bpost that it proposes to increase the stamp price for J+1 shipments, a service that until now was provided at a normal price.

In point 5, it is proposed to ensure that a qualitative and comprehensive range is offered at an acceptable distance, also outside of office hours. As far as distance is concerned, this requirement is not one, since these are requirements that have been reaffirmed in the law, again thanks to a socialist minister, Mr. by Labille.

As for the opening hours, we look forward to seeing how the government will concretely respond to this request.

In point 6, it is about paying attention to the dispersion and the number of red letter boxes.

I recognize here a certain foolishness on the part of the majority to make such a request. Will the state, through its administrators, oppose the plan to remove the red mailboxes? Do the authors have this guarantee that today, the state will act on the matter? I have heard the opposite in the committee.

In paragraph 7, it is requested to encourage the provider of the universal service to play the active role that may be its own in the implementation of the digital agenda and the offering of electronic recommended mailings as well as hybrid electronic recommended mailings across the whole territory.

Mr. Cheron, you who are my neighbor in commission, when one asks someone to play the role that may be his but which is not, the same may be not asking him anything or living with hope. This request may be hollow and meaningless but I will pay attention to it.

In paragraph 8, it is a matter of supporting the planned mergers of municipalities by requesting to provide for a sufficiently long transitional period for postal shipments in view of the street changes and the collective changes of addresses that these mergers will entail.

There will therefore be mergers of municipalities before the merger of police zones and after the merger of the ...

I am referring to point 9. I assure you, Mr. Speaker, there are only 13 and since you exceptionally gave me the floor, I will not comment on the last two points!

It is requested to evaluate federal support for written press and to examine how paper media support can be organized with greater media neutrality and future prospects for the benefit of quality journalism, while paying attention to bookstores.

For information, this request has already been the subject of a resolution adopted during this legislature. My question: Does the majority believe that the government has not sufficiently followed the first resolution voted here in the House?

I’m coming to point 10 – I confess that this is my favorite. It is said to pay particular attention to social dialogue and to support a competitive approach in terms of operational excellence, innovation, pricing and customer satisfaction rather than competition in terms of working conditions and to continue to fight, all together, against independent counterfeiters in the postal sector.

This is cynical. It was this majority and this government that allowed unlimited recourse to self-employed and subcontractors, by amending the Public Enterprises Act. It was also this majority that voted against our bill that imposed a labor contract on the head of those who distribute newspapers. It is this majority that has just refused to hear the unions about the current social conflict, despite its own commitments. and M. Flahaux could have witnessed this if his health had allowed him to do so. Finally, it is this majority that has continuously agitated the spectrum of privatization and thus aroused uncertainty about the fate of the workers.

In point 11, it is intended to encourage bpost to continue to collaborate on the federal diversity policy by presenting numerical objectives and a diversity plan with measurable objectives. It will be recalled that the majority voted against our proposal for a resolution in this regard. But, since it is you who submits it this time, ⁇ you will have more consideration for the majority than you have for us!

As for paragraphs 12 and 13, they do not call for comments. I think I have been quite precise in the previous ones.

Thank you for giving me the floor for a short moment.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to congratulate Mrs. De Block who is really all-terrain. It is obviously felt that she wants to change some air by taking care of mobility, as she did just recently, and now of the Post. This is a still remaining position.

The question raised with this resolution is the same as that raised in a committee with the refusal of the majority to hear the trade union organizations.

We are at some time of a very important management contract for an equally important public company. We talk a lot about the SNCB, but we also need to talk a little about bpost.

As a committee, we recorded the attitude of the majority who refused to organize hearings, considering that they were not necessary – which was not the case for the SNCB – and despite the high quality of the presidency we have in the Infrastructure Committee.

It started badly, but in the explanation of the reasons for the text submitted by the majority, we are speaking precisely of privatization. The CQFD. Is there a relationship between the two? I have the weakness to believe that yes.

by Mr. Devin reviewed a number of points with great accuracy. We will submit, through Mr. Vanden Burrre, two amendments. The first concerns the obligation of a post office per commune. Here we have the will to be able to have a qualitative and comprehensive assortment at the level of offices. The second – without making any reference to American cinema – relates to the passage of the factor not twice, but at least once. This is the purpose of this amendment. I am sure the Minister shares this wish.

Mr. Cheron, the Infrastructure Committee is not unknown to me. I have been chairman for a while. I recognize some things that were listed, because there were problems with it at the time.

A good service by bpost, at affordable prices, is in everyone’s interest. The government is considering how to optimise that service while keeping costs manageable and the universal service is not compromised.

According to Minister De Croo, the government has always strived to ensure the quality of postal services in the management contract with bpost and will continue to do so in the future contract.

“The Postman Always Rings Twice” is not my favourite. Anyway, my postman only has to call you once.