Proposition 55K0759

Logo (Chamber of representatives)

Proposition de modification du Règlement de la Chambre des représentants en ce qui concerne la formation du gouvernement fédéral.

General information

Authors
VB Ortwin Depoortere, Barbara Pas, Annick Ponthier, Ellen Samyn, Wouter Vermeersch
Submission date
Nov. 14, 2019
Official page
Visit
Status
Rejected
Requirement
Simple
Subjects
parliamentary scrutiny government parliamentary rules of procedure

Voting

Voted to adopt
Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI Open Vld MR PVDA | PTB
Voted to reject
N-VA LDD VB

Party dissidents

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.







Bot check: Enter the name of any Belgian province in one of the three Belgian languages:

Discussion

April 23, 2020 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Barbara Pas VB ⚙

Mr. Speaker, colleagues, the way in which a government is formed in this country can, in my opinion, use some improvement.

There are currently four models available.

The first model used by the King is completely outdated. You will not doubt my goodwill if I want to keep the King from being vulnerable when he struggles with politics and government formation. After all, it is up to the King to remain politically neutral.

The second model was already once proposed in this House by the N-VA, where the role traditionally performed by the King is assigned to the chairman of the Chamber. That has as a great advantage that this at least already breaks with the colloque singulier, but it has as a lasting disadvantage that the government formation then still proceeds through the carcan of the particulation.

The third model is known in the states. There is the disadvantage that this also does not bring about transparency and political innovation. We all know that there are agreements behind the scenes. Once the agreement is there and the investment debate is really held, it can not really be carried out in terms of content because the cricket lines are already fixed. The political agreement has already been reached. Then everyone knows in advance that, regardless of what legitimate material comments are still being made, the majority against opposition will still be approved.

Therefore, we propose a fourth model, the most democratic model. In our proposal, neither the King, nor the Chairman of the Chamber, nor the back chambers decide on the formation of government, but the whole Chamber sends the formation council. It appoints informers and trainers, opinions are public, everything is transparent. The Chamber may question the trainers about the opinions. This has the great advantage that everything is done in a transparent way and, unlike the three other models, it is also the most democratic model.

I think today’s situation only proves that we can use a democratic model. The two major parties did not fit into the federal government formation. Even coronary crises were used/abused to make a coronary coup.

The result is a situation where mini-party groups that do not yet represent 8% of the population occupy half of the ministries.

In order to avoid such events in the future and to let everything go well, democratically, we make the constructive proposal to take an example from the Dutch model. I have heard numerous colleagues here complain about the way government is formed over the past few months and I would like to invite them to reconsider the model we propose, which might even run more smoothly.