Proposition 54K2475

Projet de loi modifiant la loi du 21 décembre 1998 relative à la sécurité lors des matches de football.

General information ¶

Author

N-VA Brecht Vermeulen

Submission date

May 16, 2017

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

violence public safety sporting event sports body criminal law

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

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

Voted to reject

PVDA | PTB

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 ¶

May 24, 2018 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

The rapporteur, Mr Thiébaut, refers to his written report.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that I can take advantage of a relatively quiet plenary session to give a long introduction on the present proposal. Mr Calvo, you look at me and you know that if I stand on the floor and have worked on something for a long time, I will also explain it for a long time in the plenary session to make sure that everyone has fully understood how good the proposal presented is.

Colleagues, I am very pleased to be able to stand before you today, because I have worked for three years to improve and modernise the text on safety at football matches. In the summer of 2015 I first organized contacts with various police zones and football clubs, which then resulted in a text that was discussed in the Committee on Home Affairs in 2016. There was then a political agreement to also vote on that text, but at the request of late professor Brice De Ruyver and the Cabinet-Jambon, who wanted to see a number of things clarified, a general amendment at the very last moment has never been discussed in the committee and submitted to vote in the plenary session. Some technical changes were then approved that were absolutely necessary in order for the football competition to take place in its new formula with first class A and first class B.

Subsequently, there was a whole series of hearings with various stakeholders in Parliament, in particular the KBVB, the ACFF, the Pro League, the Football Cell, the BVBO, the South Police Zone, the ACOD as well as the chief of the corps of the Liège Zone. This resulted in the text being immediately amended with 31 amendments. Subsequently there was a discussion, which led to new amendments at the end of 2017, in particular No. 32 to 79. Subsequently, there was an opinion of the State Council, which again resulted in a series of amendments, in particular Nrs 80 to 123. Also at the time of the last discussion and the day the proposal was adopted in first reading, new amendments were submitted. Even in the second reading, amendments were added and approved.

In short, I had continued intensive consultations, not only with the political world, but also with the world that will have to deal with all changes to the football law. It is extremely important to demonstrate that the present bill has been sufficiently carried out and will be operable in the present form.

Now that the final text is there, it is important for everyone that the law comes into effect quickly. This will take place from 1 June 2018, so very soon, and at the express request of the stakeholders. That’s why I asked the Conference of Presidents yesterday to add the bill to today’s agenda, which has happened. The amendments in the bill are not all big changes in themselves, but many small changes make a big adjustment of the whole. Today, in the plenary session, I will summarize the thirty main aspects that are changing existing legislation.

First, the scope of the Football Act is extended, specifically with regard to supporter violence. One of the main changes to the bill concerns the scope of the measures against supporter violence and how to address that violence. Currently, the chapter on supporters only applies to the first class A and first class B matches and to the first and second amateur league matches. With the present bill, we wish to extend the scope to the competitions of clubs of first class A and B and to all amateur classes. In addition, even matches of the clubs of the two highest women’s football divisions and the youth matches that play eleven against eleven of the two highest national youth categories in their respective age categories will also be subject to this. So that is very concrete about the categories U14, U15, U16, U17, U19 and the promises.

That adjustment is necessary because we see a shift in the safety risks in that area, for example in the final matches of the Belgian Cup U19, to say just one thing. We see that more people with a stadium ban also become more creative and know the football law very well. Instead of committing offenses, amusing or acting incorrectly during competitions of the first eleven of the professional clubs, those individuals now go to youth and women’s competitions of their favorite clubs. This brings with it new security issues, while those escape the rules of the current football law.

I refer to a news release from last month that read that a hooligan from Club Brugge with a stadium ban was still amusing the promises. It was about the match of 2 May 2016 between Club Brugge and Standard. There was a fire in Bengal, and this should not be done in a stadium. In fact, this can be done if the football law does not apply. A steward and a chief steward saw this and intervened. The steward was beaten and even Sven Vermant, the then promise coach of Club Brugge, was then forced to intervene.

There are also shifts in the lower departments. This is mainly because there are a number of clubs with a great tradition. They have a great backbone, even though they are no longer playing in the highest ranks. I think of La Louvière, FC Liège, the former Beerschot – now somewhat climbed – and Eendracht Aalst. So there are a number of clubs that may involve a risk. In the committee, I explained in detail examples of matches from amateur series that faced supporter problems. Therefore, all matches from the amateur series will be monitored and violations will also be punished.

I would like to admit that this is not the only thing we do for these clubs. We will ensure that other measures are taken so that violence can be prevented. They may also, in a certain number of cases, employ stewards when deemed necessary by the King. I will return to that.

In order to change the scope, we had to change many definitions. The definition was simple. Thus, the definition of a football match was amended to include youth and women’s matches as well. To prevent all these clubs from meeting the obligations of an organizer, they were excluded from the definition of national and international football matches, and two new definitions were introduced, namely the national women’s and youth football match.

A second important aspect is the robustness of the football law for changes to the competition format. In 2016, we made changes to the Football Act due to the Pro League’s decision to reform competition, with the establishment of a first class A and B, and an amateur class in three rows. In order to ensure that in the future competition changes remain possible without new legislative changes, the definition of national department was introduced. Currently, the five highest departments fall under the denominator of national department.

The third facet consists in making the stadium and the perimeter also possible in lower sections. The current definition of a stadium states that both a tribune and an outer fence are needed to be able to speak of a stadium. This creates practical difficulties, as many clubs from amateur series and many youth fields have no tribune at all or even no outer fence, so the football law could not apply. In order to extend the scope of the law without incurring unnecessary costs for the clubs, we have chosen to no longer make a tribune a requirement. In addition, it is also decided that in stadiums that do not have an outer fence, the inner fence may be used as a fence area. In analogy with this reasoning, the definition of perimeter was also adjusted. Not all clubs have a tribune or outside fence. We will add a second paragraph, which allows the definition in those cases.

I come to the fourth aspect, in particular the extension of the definition of a football event, in order to enable the involvement of stewards. At present, the current football law already provides for a definition of a football event. Currently, it is mainly about training of the club, usually at fandages. We add to this a new possibility, which ensures that any football-related event, organized by a professional club or by the Football Federation in a closed place accessible to the public, can also be considered a football event. Therefore, it is necessary that there is a clear link with football.

Events that at this time will fall within the scope of football events will be fandas, regardless of whether it is a training, or club games on shift, which are displayed by the club in its own stadium. I think of the final match of Roeselare against Antwerp last season, where ten thousand supporters of Antwerp in the Bosuilstadion watched the match on a large screen. At that time there was no application of the football law, but now it will be the case. Private initiatives of organizers of football matches, therefore publicly accessible initiatives, such as a club barbecue, cannot be considered as a football event in order to place stewards there. Even a fuif organized by a club after a football match cannot be included here.

Its public character may exist, but the link with football as a sport is insufficient. The clubs must then, like other organizers of a fuif, use private security agents.

In addition, professional clubs and the Football Federation will be able to use stewards during these football events. The stewards will be given the same duties and powers as during a regular football match. It is important to note that the use of stewards is a possibility, not an obligation, as in football matches. In order to use stewards, there will be a written agreement between the organizer, the competent mayor and the relevant police zones prior to the event.

The fifth aspect is the introduction of a supporter liaison officer in the law. Since the 2012-2013 season, football clubs who apply for a UEFA license are required to appoint a supporter liaison officer or SLO. The SLO is a regulatory title of UEFA, not a legal title. With this legislative amendment, we will ensure that professional clubs in the first class A and B will be obligatory to have a SLO, and not only those clubs that have applied for a UEFA license for European football.

The SLO has a clear preventive role. Self-regulation by fans is, in our opinion, the best form of preventive measures. We want to make the most of prevention, but I know very well that we will not withdraw all violence. I will return to that later. There are also curative measures.

I would also like to emphasize that all measures relating to the SLO require an additional royal decree. This obligation is introduced in Article 8 of the law.

I come to the sixth facet, the mandated responsible. The mandated security officer is now defined in the law. Why Why ? Because in various places in the football law and in the royal decrees, the mandated security officer has already been discussed. However, unlike other persons or other functions in the safety chain, such as the stewards, there was no definition in the football law. In order to adjust this, we will add it now. It should also be clear to everyone what role that person can play.

In addition, all provisions of the law referring to the safety officer have been adjusted and converted to the correct form, which is "delegated safety officer".

Then we get to the seventh facet. The safety agreement is mandatory in the first amateur class. That security agreement is an important document of agreement between all relevant stakeholders, namely the club, the police zones, the emergency services and the local government. Because the cost of concluding such a security agreement is quite limited for the clubs – it is actually just a little time effort for the safety manager – it has been chosen to implement the obligation linearly for the first amateur class.

You will also hear from me that we want to limit a possible increase in costs. This has always been an essential focus. Each decision has always been closely examined whether the increased safety benefits are sufficiently proportionate to the possible costs and therefore accountable. We have had a very extensive consultation with our partners, such as the Pro League and the Royal Belgian Football Federation.

Then I come to the eighth aspect. From now on, the security agreement should be concluded before 21 July rather than before 1 August. The reason is the following. In the past it has always been the case that the football season started the first week of August, but in recent years we see more and more that the first matches of first class A are already completed in the last weekend of July. The 2017-2018 season started on 28 July, the previous seasons on 29 July and 24 July. We therefore ensure that no safety agreements are concluded after the season has already begun.

Then we come to the ninth facet. We give more time to the clubs that have to conclude a security agreement for one specific match. I am speaking here specifically about clubs from provincial departments or amateur classes who are lucky enough to hit far in the Belgian Cup, who win several matches after each other and then suddenly are lucky enough to receive a large first-class club. At first they are always very happy to receive that club, because it means a lot of canteen and other income, but suddenly it turns out that it is accompanied by many security agreements.

The drawings of that series of matches are sometimes very close to each other, making the existing eight-day deadline too long. Sometimes there is only a seven-day period between, so there can be no eight-day period to conclude an agreement. So we ensure that the football club from a lower division has the opportunity to conclude an agreement up to five days before the match takes place.

The tenth aspect is that in the first amateur class a mandated safety officer is required. We even give a delegation to the King to make it mandatory in the second and third amateur class.

We talked about the security agreement. All clubs from the first amateur class will now also have to designate a mandated security officer.

For the clubs concerned, this obligation is not an excessive burden. After all, as I also demonstrated in detail during the discussion in the committee, most clubs active in the first amateur league – the former third national division – have a past in the former second class. Previously, they had a security officer. Most of the officials also retained their functions.

We give, as already mentioned, a delegation to the King, which should make it possible in the second or third amateur league to make a mandated security officer mandatory. That, of course, has everything to do with clubs that may potentially pose a high risk because they have a traditional backbone, more supporters and sometimes a different reputation.

The eleventh aspect is that also the betting of stewards in amateur series can be made mandatory by the King.

If a security manager can be required, we can also consider using stewards and we can make them mandatory in traditional clubs for which we judge, or for which the King judges, that a steward may be necessary in order to guarantee safety in those competitions.

We can’t do that with every club. This should be done after a risk analysis. In order to ensure that there is no disproportionate burden on a club, we will examine a number of things carefully. A mandate is given to the King. Therefore, we do not choose to apply the measure linearly.

The delegation imposes a number of obligations. I have already pointed out that a mandatory risk analysis should be carried out, which should show that the contest in question involves an increased risk and that therefore it is better to use stewards in that contest.

The twelfth facet concerns a local advisory council which by the King may also be mandatory in amateur classes. In a local advisory council, all relevant actors will be brought together to coordinate the club’s local security policy. By making evaluations and reflections on the security policy, the whole is improved. If the King considers this necessary, the amateur clubs will now also be given the opportunity to set up such a local advisory council.

The thirteenth aspect is hospitality. Hospitality is a strange story because that term is difficult to define in what we should do in ordinary legislation. Clubs from first class A and B and the first amateur league will have to take measures to "assure hospitality and comfort in the stadiums," it says literally. These are subjective concepts. It is intended that the Football Cell of Homeland Affairs further translates these subjective concepts into minimum quality requirements. I mean, in particular, sufficient minimum sanitary facilities, so that a visiting supporter does not end up in a garbage dump, but is treated equally as a home athlete. The mere presence of toilets could now still be enough, but with the new provision we say that hospitality and comfort are also necessary.

A delegation will also be given to the King to further tighten the security measures. In order to optimise the quality of the legislative work, the State Council was consulted. One of the recommendations was to strengthen the delegation to the King for security measures in Article 10 by supplementing the paragraph with the provision that every additional security measure must always be ratified by a law. We have adopted that recommendation. That was the fourteenth facet.

The fifteenth aspect concerns the divorce of supporters. If we had not paid attention to its definition, there was the risk that a supporter divorce would be mandatory in the first amateur league. That would be very strange, because we now actually make it possible that for home clubs in some cases it must be logistically and organizational perfectly possible to allow visiting supporters to take place among the home supporters because there is sufficient social control to make the security risk manageable. A number of professional clubs, such as KV Kortrijk, use this. I am not a supporter of KV Kortrijk at all, but I have cited that example more than once. Now that clubs from the first amateur class are also required to take safety measures, we will have to ensure that they also get that opportunity. Otherwise, they will receive a risk penalty, which is not intended.

Facet 16 is a new chapter on the use of cameras in football stadiums. I have already ⁇ that we have asked the State Council for an opinion on this bill. One of the remarks was that it is not the King, but the legislator to determine in what cases and under what conditions photographs may be made and what the purpose of those recordings should be. Thus, a new chapter is added to develop more detailed rules. In fact, we are building on the already existing Royal Decree of 22 February 2006 concerning the installation and operation of surveillance cameras in football stadiums.

From 25 May, the General Data Protection Regulation will come into force. Both the cabinet of Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Interior Jambon and the cabinet of State Secretary for Privacy De Backer we have asked what provisions are needed in the legislation. The inserted articles are now in accordance with the GDPR directives.

Facet 17 is about placing stewards in a perimeter around the stadium. The duties of stewards are expanded, making it possible to deploy stewards in a perimeter around the stadium.

The [...]

Mrs. Lalieux, you are very interested and that makes me happy, because this will be absolutely important for the city of Brussels as well.

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, we provide two possible tasks for stewards in the perimeter. Stewards will be given the opportunity to accompany referees, staff, players and official delegations. In addition, stewards will also be used on parking spaces operated by the organizers of a contest, where they can take care of the reception of the spectators.

Facet of 18. The mandated security officer must ensure the flow of information for the meeting with other clubs. The law obliges the mandated security officer from now on to pass the information about collective movements of the players, staff, referees and official delegations to the police zones. In the past, this did not happen. This caused problems because it was not clear who was responsible. That is why we are now adjusting this.

Man of 19. The stewards may also take away prohibited objects, prohibited by the club’s internal rules. The bill requires the organizers of football matches in the first class A and B and in the first amateur league to draw up a domestic regulation. It can determine which objects are prohibited. As a result of the current change, stewards can request to release banned objects after a superficial inspection.

The [...]

Mrs. Lalieux, the most beautiful thing has yet to come.

Fact 20 provides for sanctions for clubs that fail to meet their obligations. At the moment, it is the only clubs from first class A and B that have obligations as an organizer provided for in the football law. Now, certain parts of the law will also apply to amateur clubs. We need to ensure that those clubs can also get a penalty or escape.

Facet 21, a ban on pyrotechnical materials in the perimeter and during collective movements. It is a sad finding – as we recently saw on television – that the use of pyrotechnical materials in and around the football stadiums is increasing. Last year, 32% of competitions involved incidents involving so-called pyrotechnic materials. This amounted to 43% of the competitions. Therefore, the law needs to be tightened and the possession of foot-seekers, fireworks or smoke bombs is already prohibited in the stadium. This law also criminalizes the use. It also prohibits the use and possession of pyrotechnical materials in the perimeter around the stadium and during collective movements. This is necessary because collective movements regularly stop at parking areas along the motorways where one then suddenly uses pyrotechnical material, with high risks of fire and explosion. This is not within the perimeter of the stadium and not within the fence. Consequently, we will provide for an extension and ensure that it is adjusted.

We, of course, also ensure that the use of pyrotechnical equipment on the whole Belgian territory in connection with football matches can be addressed with a ban.

Sometimes you think it is not dangerous. This is evidenced by a number of interventions and reactions I have received on this point. It is thought to be beautiful and fun and contributes to the atmosphere. However, we must not forget that Bengal fire raises temperatures above 1 000 °C and causes very severe burns. Foot-seekers have also led to problems of permanent hearing damage more than once.

The Fact 22. The football law is extended to 48 hours before and after the match for football-related violence. We see that there are incentives for strikes and injuries due to football matches. This is especially true of European competitions. Therefore, the deadline is extended from 24 hours to 48 hours.

Man of 23. The equal punishment throughout the territory of violence committed by one person or by a group. Punishing violations by one person in the same way as violations by a group represents a challenge, since other provisions now concern the use of force in a stadium and the perimeter and it is, of course, not logical that a violation by one person is not prosecuted, but the same violation by two or more persons do.

The Facet 24. A system of warnings. This is the biggest adjustment to existing legislation. That warning system should enable those who commit violations to be punished in a non-monetary manner. The football law now provides for a very extensive arsenal of penalties to curb wrong supporter behavior, but it often involves emotional matters. In order to ensure that the Football Cell of the FOD Internal Affairs does not punish too easily, too quickly or too harshly, we believe that some adjustment should be possible. The purpose of my work on the present bill is to be gentle to so-called first offenders, especially in the case of minor offenses. The simple lifting of a middle finger should ⁇ not be automatically equated with inciting hatred or anger. I honestly admit that I have done it myself several times at an emotional moment during the contest and I think such punishments go too far for that.

Therefore, we provide for a new instrument, namely an official warning mechanism, which will be registered in the law. This allows police officers to issue a warning. Some local police zones use such a warning. The intended effect, which is also achieved by those police zones, is clear: the behavior is corrected very quickly without the police having to act really repressively. An official warning is possible for all violations, but of course it is not intended that violent crimes would be punished less. Therefore, it is up to the police officer to judge and consider a breach as a warning.

The goal of the football law should ⁇ not be to prepare as many processes-verbal as possible, but rather to correct the behavior of people, not through months-long procedures, but rather as quickly as possible. Police zones that do not want to use the instrument should not use it, but there will be the possibility to embrace the good practices of other zones.

The bill provides for another type of warning, which we want to prevent from being punished in a different way depending on whether or not a police zone uses the system. With the extension of Article 37, the Football Cell can also impose a warning at the end of the procedure, resulting in everyone being treated equally.

Fact 25, the abolition of the administrative notification obligation. Previous legislation provided for an administrative notification obligation, but it was never ratified by any implementing decision. Thus, it could not be made hard in practice. I am convinced that in the future we can use technological resources to make the administrative notification obligation possible. At the moment, there is no clear answer; therefore, it is being removed from existing legislation.

The administrative prohibition to leave the territory is also amended. That was already said. I will not go into it too deeply, then Mrs. Lalieux will ⁇ be satisfied.

Facet 27, the effective sanctions are addressed and a number of gaps are addressed.

Important is the notification of the decision of the Football Cell. If a person fails to pay the imposed fine, this will also be notified so that the Football Cell will be given the instruments to enforce a claim.

Facet 29, the sale of tickets in home subjects by visiting supporters is prohibited and even punished. Indeed, it occurred more often that in competitions there were undesirable supporters of the visitors with the home supporters or where tickets were bought for profit to be sold.

Finally, in connection with privacy, we refer to the Data Protection Authority, which we have talked about more often in recent days.

I would like to thank all committee members. I look at Mr. Thiébaut, who is now quiet, but was very constructive. I also look at Ms. Poncelet, among others, and also on employees. Members of the majority parties and of the opposition have all made interesting and justified comments, and I have accepted them.

We did not always agree with each other, which is typical for the political battle scene, but we respected each other and listened to the expertise, which can also come from others.

The bill was approved in the first reading almost unanimously with an abstinence. This abstinence was converted in second reading into an approval. The proposal was again approved in second reading almost unanimously, with one abstinence, but then by another party.

Thank you all for your constructive attention.

Mr. Speaker, as you have heard, I was the rapporteur of this bill. I exempted you from the full reading of the excellent report I had prepared with Parliament’s collaborators because I suspected that Mr. Vermeulen’s exhibition would be very complete. In the commission, it was even longer!

The [...]

He is more Belgian than he seems.

A few words about this proposal that aims to transform the Football Act, which this year celebrates its twenty-year anniversary, and that allows it to get in line with the new realities of Belgian football and the field experiences both from the point of view of the clubs of the Belgian Union as well as the police and the mayors.

I will not return to the major developments proposed in this text, which have been widely recalled to you and which respond to some of our concerns, including the extension of the perimeter concerned beyond the strict proximity of the terrain, the inclusion of the notion of “football event” in terms of the use of stewards or even the possibilities left to the police of a more gradual approach to sanctions. These developments make, in our opinion, the text more efficient and also facilitate the work of local police areas, which is not negligible in the current context. Here is a brief summary of the work carried out in this committee.

We were constructive in the committee – Vermeulen noted – despite working conditions that were not simple because the text was heavily amended. It has not always been easy to make the synthesis, which you have had the live demonstration of.

In the meantime, I would like to thank the services for their excellent work.

We have supported this text in the committee, and we will continue to support it today at the end of the session.

However, I would like to highlight some points that will continue to be the subject of our attention and that of the government after the adoption of the text. Reassure yourself, there are three.

First, the measures proposed here will have a cost. It is obvious. No one denies it even though it is difficult to evaluate today. It is therefore necessary to repeat it once again. This cost should not be borne by the police districts and should not endanger the finances of the most fragile clubs.

Secondly, as far as stewards are concerned, I recall that they are not police officers. They are also not private security agents. These are volunteers who participate in ensuring that the great football party takes place in the best conditions for all. In this context and given the competencies conferred on them, the question of their training should be given special attention.

Third, this is a point that, ultimately, is valid as much for this text as for many others, it is that of the monitoring of the framework in the management of the cameras that we are proposing to use. They will be useful, but it will be necessary to ensure that future privacy authorities will be able to monitor the management of these images, databases, etc.

Here is, collected in a few words, for your greatest pleasure, the position of my group that I wanted to share with you. I confirm that we will vote for and thank you for your attention.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to give a brief explanation of the long road that has been taken to this conclusion. Mr. Vermeulen, in terms of football, it wasn’t a 90 minute match because we needed a few extensions.

Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that at the start of the discussions in the committee, Open Vld expressed some concerns about the original text, concerns about the proportionality of a number of measures, concerns about the cost sheet, which Mr Thiébaut also talked about, and concerns about the scope, which we thought at first was too broad.

Mr. Vermeulen, I have said in the committee, among other things, that the majority of our football matches, fortunately, run smoothly, and that we should therefore ⁇ have that in mind when drafting this text.

So we have been constructively involved in the upcoming adjustment, paying attention to three difficulties that I will briefly outline. First, necessity, desirability and proportionality. I have already said that the scope at first was too broad. Second, the obligations of amateur clubs and the related costs. Third, the extension of the scope of security cameras. This should be limited to the first two national departments. For lower categories, the new camera legislation may apply.

We have come to a balanced text, with a good balance between all stakeholders. That’s not just the football cell, but our police, our local authorities, our football clubs and, last but not least, our players from younger to younger and all the supporters around them. As they say, football should be a party.

It is a balanced text. The definition of football games has been restricted. Not all women’s and youth competitions are included. A new definition of national department was introduced. New competition changes will no longer have an impact on the football law, as they did last year.

The clubs from the first amateur league were imposed a number of additional obligations, but without much organizational burden or cost: the conclusion of the security agreement with the local government, the appointment of a mandated security officer, the drafting and enforcement of an internal regulation.

The new stewards system is regulated in such a way that the Minister of the Interior will determine which clubs from the amateur series are obliged to deploy stewards. This will only be done after a risk analysis indicates that it is necessary.

The powers of the stewards are somewhat broadened. According to Open Vld, it is important to emphasize the role of the stewards. They ensure that there is less need for police involvement and that there are fewer costs for society.

It has already been talked about the danger of pyrotechnical equipment and the fact that the criminalization of its possession and use is now being registered. The official warning, which is a good practice, is now being incorporated into the law. We think that is a good signal.

Finally, through this text, the clubs are being held accountable in terms of security, which is ⁇ a good thing.

The date of entry into force is 1 June. We play very short on the ball. Today is May 24. It is unlikely that the text will still be published in the Belgian Official Journal on the date of entry into force. This is not ideal, but the circumstances have made it so.

Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to end my speech by congratulating the chief rapporteur, Mr. Brecht Vermeulen, who is not only a Member of Parliament but also Vice-President of KSK Roeselare.

Mr. Vermeulen, although another West Flemish club has become champion, Brugge, but I hope that you as West Flaming are proud that this has succeeded.

I hope, dear colleagues, that this text will bring even more football fun in the coming weeks, as the important World Cup is coming.

Mr. Speaker, this text has the merit of expanding the notion of a risky football match and thus increasing the number of events for which it will apply. It also has the merit of reconsidering and improving the security arrangement to be put in place, taking into account effective technical means.

This text therefore makes it mandatory to provide for the material means for the safety of everyone: the spectators, the organizers, the clubs, the security officials and of course the players. In particular, a completely new chapter dedicated to the installation and operation of surveillance cameras – a very important hardware element – is inserted.

There is also the obligation to provide for greater, more efficient human resources, through the recruitment of stewards and liaison agents between clubs, supporters and administrative authorities. These are very important agents for coordinating all security stakeholders, as well as mandated security officials.

In a committee, we found that members of the majority expressed similar concerns as ours, in particular with regard to the cost for the organizers and consistency with the provisions on surveillance cameras, with the implementation of the GDPR.

The text has also been amended, over-amended. It was quite surprising to see the number of amendments that were introduced. As a result, we have been able to ⁇ a balanced text that truly meets the concerns of security officials. I think of the mayor in particular. As a mayor of a small municipality, I will not have to apply this text but I know how important and secure it is to be able to rely on texts that allow to function and to put effective security measures, in connection with the importance of events.

For all these reasons, our group will vote in favour of this text.