POLITICS & INSTITUTIONS - ECONOMY

Concern from professional chambers over legislative frenzy



The rate at which the government is proposing and passing legislative texts is no longer sustainable, according to the professional chambers Matic Zorman/archives

The rate at which the government is proposing and passing legislative texts is no longer sustainable, according to the professional chambers Matic Zorman/archives

The adoption of urgent legislation to deal with the covid-19 crisis has been deemed unacceptable by the Chamber of Trades and the Chamber of Commerce. Unable to analyse them in depth, they believe that the measures could be harmful for companies. 

The rate at which the government is proposing and passing legislative texts is no longer sustainable. As they noted in a communiqué, “The Chamber of Commerce and the Chamber of Trades stress that they have been asked for their opinion on no less than four projects (a bill and three draft grand-ducal regulations) relating to leave for family reasons between the 15th and January 22, 2021, in the space of just a week, one of which was published almost immediately on January 20, 2021 and two others were published on January 22, 2021.”

Such frenzy is strongly criticised, and the chambers say the situation "does not find relevant explanations and ultimately proves to be legally harmful for companies". The urgency "is unacceptable for the two professional chambers insofar as it does not allow them to pronounce in an appropriate manner on subjects which are nevertheless crucial for companies".

Opinions not taken into account

The government would therefore show a lack of anticipation. For example, with regard to the school closuresin neighbouring countries, “while the health crisis linked to the covid-19 pandemic has been ongoing for nearly one year and the situations that Luxembourg confronts due to this are ultimately recurrent."

Also of concern is "the consistency of the legal framework, its readability and legal security, but above all the difficulty of their application by companies".

Finally, the two chambers stress that, although in a hurry, they have done what is necessary to systematically provide structured and relevant opinions but deplore "that the legal questions and problems which they took the time to raise and develop in their opinions did not have a particular echo in the projects which followed".

This article was published in French on Paperjam.lu and has been translated and edited for Delano.