Vlaams Belang and N-VA steal the show in parliament by camping out on lecterns for hours

Hotels were booked for parliamentary staff, the most pointless speeches ever written. Member of Parliament Theo Francken (N-VA) even brought books to read from. It did not promise to be a beautiful spectacle in the federal parliament. Opposition parties N-VA and Vlaams Belang made every effort to delay the return law of State Secretary for Asylum and Migration Nicole de Moor (CD&V). Vlaams Belang requested speaking time for no fewer than 16 of their faction members, half an hour each. As if that hour-long speech was not enough to make their point, the far-right party also submitted a hundred amendments to the law. Five minutes of speaking time was added for each amendment.

That is not a normal way of working. ‘Filibustering’, or filling up a parliamentary session, is a proven tactic to prevent the political opponent from achieving victory. In the past it was successfully applied by Jean-Marie Dedecker, among others. So close to the elections, it is sometimes used to make a point about a certain issue. So double the price.

“We are going to enter into a parliamentary fight,” was how Francken put it. Vlaams Belang faction leader Barbara Pas had announced an “amendment and procedural battle”. “With this way of working, the majority knows what they are getting into, but not where they will end up.” There were rumors that both parties wanted to extend the hearing until Friday afternoon if necessary.

Persistent return policy

Of course, it should not be surprising that Francken and Vlaams Belang set their foot on a migration file. State Secretary De Moor has been trying to get her return law through parliament for months. This provides for a “sustained return policy” to guide undocumented people to their country of origin. Every year, between 30,000 and 50,000 people are ordered to leave Belgian territory. They are first encouraged to return voluntarily. If they do not, forced return may follow.

The procedures must be adjusted accordingly. Deals are needed with countries of origin such as Morocco and Tunisia. But also instruments to intensively monitor people without papers. The spearhead of the new Vivaldi law is the introduction of an obligation to cooperate and expanding the group of return counselors.

(Read more below the photo)

A step towards more returns. And yet right-wing parties consider the deal insufficient. After all, a number of measures have collapsed under pressure from the left-wing parties in the federal government. Families with children may not be detained in closed reception centres. This is anchored in the new law. Residential entrances to invade a sans-paper home did not make it into the text. “Without those measures, this law will not make any difference,” says Vlaams Belang faction leader Barbara Pas.

Battle of attrition

The opposition first tried to undermine the law by sending it to the Council of State again. But N-VA and Vlaams Belang needed the support of PVDA for this. This did not happen, which meant that the majority was able to unexpectedly put the return law on the agenda at the plenary meeting. “The legislation can still be delayed there, but not collapsed,” the N-VA admits. Especially since parliament will still meet until May 8.

Nicole de Moor argued that the vote will still happen – and therefore also the law. Even if it is after a parliamentary war of attrition. “I will continue to persevere. The law must be voted on.”

The majority proposed a new change to the agenda on Thursday evening, postponing the vote to next week. The proposal was accepted by N-VA, on the condition that speaking time would be unlimited and that the majority would be present throughout the night. “Otherwise we will ask to postpone the debate until next week,” Sander Loones threatened. Vlaams Belang did not support the proposal and did not vote, in protest. The other opposition factions also did not vote.

(Read more below the photo)

Ultimately, the new persistent return policy was debated on Thursday night from 11:15 PM until around 3:45 AM. There was no real filibustering – which often involved deviating from the actual subject. De Moor, who remained present all night, even thanked the parliamentarians involved for the “substantive discussion”.

So we now have to wait for next week for the actual vote. In addition to the persistent return policy, the compensation of terror victims, the inclusion of animal welfare in the Constitution and the amended law on open government were also on the agenda of the House on Thursday. Those texts will also not be voted on until next week.