Proposition de résolution relative au contrôle du démarchage téléphonique.
General information ¶
- Authors
- LE Benoît Lutgen, Michel de Lamotte
- Submission date
- Oct. 4, 2017
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Rejected
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- protection of privacy data protection theory of marketing resolution of parliament telephone
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- CD&V Open Vld N-VA LDD MR
- Voted to reject
- Groen Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI ∉ PVDA | PTB PP VB
Party dissidents ¶
- Olivier Maingain (MR) voted to reject.
- Anne Dedry (Groen) abstained from voting.
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. 20, 2018 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
Michel de Lamotte LE ⚙
Mr. Speaker, this proposal for a resolution has made a long parliamentary journey, since it dates from October 4, 2017, with turns, opinions, an opinion of the Minister, simply, to realize that the majority of citizens have already been the target of unsolicited telephone marketing. One can call this advertising phone call, direct prospecting voice calls.- who was not asked to buy a couch, an encyclopedia or wine bottles? – and also, telephone prospecting, telemarketing or telephone demarcation.
Two solutions are generally advanced in the face of the problem of the massive sending of these unsolicited advertising messages. On the one hand, there is the principle authorization for unsolicited advertising unless the recipient has objected to it. This is the opt-out technique. On the other hand, the prohibition of such advertisements, unless obtained the prior consent of the recipient, is the opt-in.
With regard to e-mail advertising, it is the opt-in that has been privileged in Belgium. It is also applicable with regard to the use of call machines and fax machines. In contrast, this is the opt-out with regard to advertisements displayed as part of all other communication techniques for direct marketing.
Consequently, the consumer must oppose these practices if he no longer wishes to be requested.
The initial provisions, unfortunately, were not effective, but they have been modified several times. And new since 2015, a list exists, entitled "Do Not Call Me Now!" "Do Not Call Me Now!", which includes telephone subscribers who no longer want to be called for product or service advertising or social promotion.
Therefore, companies that need or want to call should, in advance, consult this list. It is thus possible to file a complaint with the contact point of the SPF Economie if this technique is not complied with.
This is an important element, because when you consult the Department of Economic Affairs, you realize that a number of people on the list remain consulted by untimely phone calls to sell products or services. And it should be known that there are more than 1.1 million people on this list, but in fact, in recent years, more than 6,630 complaints are registered with SPF.
Therefore, the system does not work. The draft resolution, as it is formulated, asks the Minister, for Consumer Protection, to support the efforts of the ASBL "Do Not Call Me!" to increase the awareness of the "Do Not Call Me!" list among consumers and professionals practicing telephone marketing in Belgium and abroad, through communication campaigns, or other.
I will not cite all the requests, but among them is a proactive struggle against unsolicited telephone marketing from abroad, in an perspective of preventing and neutralizing the problem at the source, since using a call center located abroad allows to bypass Belgian legislation.
This text had the advantage of wanting to develop a real consumer protection among our fellow citizens. It was rejected in the committee. I requested his re-registration to draw everyone’s attention to these aggressive, unsolicited practices that sometimes exceed the limits as they target vulnerable audiences, who do not have access to computer technology to register on the list of denied calls.
Given the digital divide, it is necessary that this information is not only available on social networks, so that people who do not have access to them can know these lists and let them know that they no longer want to be called.
This is the proposal that was submitted to the committee and which the committee rejected. Believe me, I regret it!