Proposition 54K2965

Proposition de résolution relative au comportement de l'autorité fédérale en matière de paiement.

General information ¶

Authors

CD&V Leen Dierick, Griet Smaers
N-VA Rita Gantois, Werner Janssen, Johan Klaps, Bert Wollants
Open Vld Nele Lijnen

Submission date

March 2, 2018

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

payment invoicing resolution of parliament public authorities public administration

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR PVDA | PTB PP 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 3, 2018 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

I will again take the word very briefly.

This is a proposal for a resolution containing recommendations relating to the payment behavior of the federal government. Apparently, the deadlines are not really respected by, on the one hand, the backdoors in the legislation and, on the other hand, the lack of information. Therefore, a number of colleagues submitted a proposal for a resolution with a view to making payments faster and, if necessary, inviting officials to the committee to respond in the event of long payments.

This resolution was also unanimously adopted in the committee.

Thank you, Mrs. Detiège, for the excellent summary.

The discussion was short and the consensus was large. With this resolution, we are taking an important step. Indeed, smooth payments have a direct impact on the investment policies of our companies, especially SMEs.

It is surprising, however, that 20% of our companies indicate that they will hire people faster if bills are paid faster and on time. So we must all strive for that.

The current system is not perfect. I have submitted a bill to regulate this between companies, but we have not yet come to the discussion.

It is good to call the government first. The government is taking steps to pay the bills faster, but we are still far from where we should be. On average, the Belgian government pays bills after 73 days. In the Netherlands it is 44 days, in Germany it is 36. So we still have a long way to go to get better figures.

There can be several ways to address the problem. Our idea is to increase political pressure on responsible politicians by obliging them to present their figures to Parliament annually. I think this is the best way to keep the pressure high. Each department must decide for itself how it achieves its objectives, because that is not the responsibility of Parliament. We want to see the results. During the annual presentation of the figures, we will be able to critically question and account for any further issue, if the situation does not improve.

Thank you for supporting the common goal. What the government requires from companies and citizens, it must first of all do it itself.

Compliance with payment deadlines is a component of good governance. By strengthening the confidence of citizens and ⁇ in public authorities, it enables, in particular, our SMEs to have a sound cash system.

It is extremely damaging that companies, as a result of late payments, have difficulty paying suppliers and also fulfilling their tax obligations. Subsidiarily, this may also have an impact on their investment capacity and job creation.

The government is sensitive to this problem and has already taken a number of concrete and lasting measures to limit late payments. In particular, I cite investments in new IT modules, as part of the implementation of electronic billing, and the development of a platform for the integrated management of public procurement.

As each department is responsible for its accounting and the organization of its services, it is essential to raise awareness of the administrations so that they apply the recommendations formulated through the existing technical tools and functionalities.

The preparation of an annual report provided for in this resolution, which would give rise to an annual discussion in the committee, would thus allow to analyze the efforts made and encourage each department to adopt the best payment behavior. Therefore, the MR will speak in favour of this proposal for resolution.

As others have said, this issue is very important. The concern is profound and we all shared it in committee.

On the part of the Ecolo-Groen group, we have been speaking for years about the late payment of the federal state, of an interpellant scale.

Some additional figures compared to the text: The Belgian state is in the top 5 of the European countries that pay the most late. Belgium is in line with Greece, Spain, Portugal... According to Graydon, in the third quarter of 2017, the federal administration would have paid only 61% of the bills in time; 11% of the bills are paid with 90 days of delay. According to another barometer, Intrum Justitia, public authorities are by far the worst payers with an average delay of 69 days; among companies, this delay revolves around 44 days. The total of these cumulative delays would amount, last year, to more than 9.6 billion euros for the Belgian economy.

As others have already said, the first entities affected by these delays are small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), micro-small enterprises (SMEs) and self-employed persons who, due to such delays in payment, can suffer from cash problems that can lead to heavy consequences, including balance sheet filing, up to bankruptcy. According to the latest survey conducted by the UCM, unpaid bills are the third cause of financial problems for self-employed and small ⁇ in our country. More than cash problems, these delays can therefore cause a large number of bankruptcies.

Yes, dear colleagues of the majority, this is a problem that interpels us especially and that we take hand-to-body. Yes, dear colleagues of the majority, it is very good to submit a proposal for a resolution seeking an improvement of the situation. However, would it not be more effective to interpell the ministers of your political parties who are in charge of these departments? I think of finance and budget. It is at this level that the levers of action are found.

We will vote on a draft resolution. To make things clear, I would like to draw attention here to the fact that we will vote in favour of this resolution. But the leverage of action is in the hands of your ministers within the government.

Your responsibility and that of this government is very clear. Sometimes a scheme is worth more than great explanations. (Mr. Vanden Burre shows a graph) Look at the evolution of the percentage of unpaid invoices over thirty days after the validation period, since 2010. The red lines you see correspond to the beginning of the entry into office of the Michel 1er government. We can see that the situation has not improved at all. We can even talk about deterioration. In any case, this has had no effect on the evolution of the situation.

This is extremely interpellant. Since 2010, we have been in the same situation quite challenging and catastrophic.

Dear colleague Klaps, you who are among the first signatories of this resolution that we will support, take the phone of Minister Van Overtveldt, take the phone of your colleagues in the Budget Committee and do something! These numbers come from Graydon, so the same sources you have in your resolution proposal!

Mr Vanden Burre, on the one hand, you find it a good resolution that you will support, on the other hand, you ask why the ministers are not interpelled. We can do it... (Tumult)

I think the colleagues on the other side are asking the word.

You have the word, Mr. Klaps.

We could do it and we do it, but with the present resolution we do much more. After all, we do not occasionally ask a minister how it is with his department – for all clarity: Minister Van Overtveldt is responsible for the revenues, not for the expenses. This is a mistake you make more often. We do not ask a minister how it is with his department. With this resolution, we ask all ministers, the entire government, to submit their figures on this subject annually. That is important. If the figures get worse, we would like to hear an explanation. I have also told you in the committee that if that explanation is not sufficient, we will be the first to submit critical questions there too. In most cases it has been different in the past.

What have you done since 2014? This is my question.

Second, what you propose in the resolution – which, I repeat, we will support – is actually the work of the Court of Auditors. The Court of Auditors does this work. Every year, we look at the problem. She audits each department, each SPF, and she makes an analysis and makes recommendations. The last date of October 2017.

The Court of Auditors examined the measures of four federal departments: Police, SPF Employment, SPF Economy and SPP Scientific Policy. It analyzed what was implemented to comply with payment deadlines for purchases of goods and services. It also assessed the percentage of invoices that suffered a late payment.

The Court identifies numerous shortcomings in the application of the regulations on payment deadlines, as regards the calculation of the deadline and the granting of delay interest. This is due, among other things, to weaknesses in internal control.

Furthermore, the configuration of Fedcom – the app you’re talking about – and the insufficient management of departments, i.e. the lack of staff available to implement this policy and reduce payment delays, do not facilitate the optimal management of payment deadlines. I refer to the Court of Auditors.

Following this analysis, the Court of Auditors issued criticisms and recommendations. She did so in 2017, 2016 and 2015. You see, things are done, in a very concrete way. She issued a whole series of recommendations, which I have here before my eyes. I will take them back quickly.

Documents are missing in the liquidation files, which does not allow to determine the exact deadline for payment. There is a difference between the entry date of the invoice and the registration date. Most departments do not draw up a record when the control of receiving goods or services has been finalised. However, it is recommended in a royal arrest. Finally, most departments pay delay interest only when suppliers explicitly request it, while this is a legal obligation.

In order to be constructive, and to give even more weight to this resolution proposal that you submit today, we ask for two things. These are the amendments we have submitted. I hope that all colleagues can support them. We request that the recommendations of the Court of Auditors be added to the text. We ask to add very precisely the measures recommended in the October 2017 report to give even greater strength to what we are asking here.

We also request, as you do, but in an increased way, that the audit of the Court of Auditors be conducted annually by department on late payments and be also presented in a parliamentary committee. This is a minimum if we want to improve the current situation which, unfortunately, has not moved since 2014!

There is indeed a difference in the approach to problems. We have seen this in other files as well. Collega Vanden Burre asks to simply take over the recommendations of the Court of Auditors. However, those recommendations already exist and I do not see the added value thereof.

However, there is also a principled disagreement. The recommendations of the Court of Auditors are very valuable and every minister must work on them. What interests me, however, is the outcome of that exercise. What we demand from the government is an improvement. Whether that result should be achieved with more staff, with more IT or through an internal reorganization of each department is something that, in my philosophy, should not be imposed by Parliament. Apparently, colleague Vanden Burre believes that we should do that. What I am interested in is what results will be presented here by the various departments next year. If that result is not sufficient, I will ask the ministers concerned critical questions. However, I think that each department must set up its own organization in order to be able to pay the bills on time.

Mr. Speaker, CD&V also supports this resolution.

There have already been several protests arguing why this is a good resolution. For us, it is important to emphasize again the role of example of government. It must demonstrate to all private companies that timely payment is important. In the past, late payment by the government has often caused liquidity problems, ⁇ in SMEs. If it was really difficult, then there were also financial problems. We therefore consider it important that the government effectively fulfils its role of example and therefore pays in time. We therefore support this resolution.

Colleague Vanden Burre, it is correct that the Court of Auditors has already ⁇ this on several occasions. It was not only about the payment deadlines and any late payments by the government, but also about the increase of interest from late payments and the costs thereof for the government. This is also an important element. It is not only a matter of paying on time, but should also avoid interest and thus reduce the costs as much as possible.

In my opinion, it is not necessary to remain in this regard any longer and to argue that the recommendations of the Court of Auditors should be integrated into it. The recommendations are known to us, only more work needs to be done. If we can contribute to this with a resolution, we would like to do so, but I agree that the government, with the members of the government and their delegates in particular, should work on it anyway. Why not contribute if it can? I hope that this resolution can contribute to this.

Mr. Speaker, we support this resolution, but I would like to make a few comments.

Dear colleagues, when we submit a resolution from the opposition, you often do not sign it, saying that the government is already working on the problems and that the resolution is therefore not needed. Now I see that you are submitting a resolution yourself, so I suspect that you mean that the government is not working on it. That is why you want to point out this to the government. It is important for the government to pay its bills on time. The government has a role of example, especially when the government imposes heavy fines on those who do not pay their taxes on time. It is a collective responsibility.

I would like to thank Mr Vanden Burre for referring to the Court of Auditors. I even want to go further. Last week, the Court of Auditors submitted a dossier on policy evaluation in the federal institutions. The general conclusion of this is that audits are generally carried out too little and that the policy is evaluated too little in the various sectors. The Government Agreement stipulates that Minister Vandeput as responsible minister for the organization of the federal administrations must ensure audits to cooperate and work better. The Court of Auditors makes excellent policy recommendations in this regard.

Well, colleagues, maybe you should consider a next resolution, focused on results, at the attention of Minister Vandeput, who will ⁇ work on it.