MeAC – Measuring Progress of eAccessibility in Europe

Legislation/regulations

The main focus to date of universal service provisions in Belgium has been on affordability.  Article 84 of the law of 21/03/1991 on universal service defines a number of minimal services, including “the provision of basic vocal phone services for human and social reasons, to persons identified by the legislation.” The legislation only deals with affordability and Annex B of the law (Articles 1.3.2°, 1.5, 2, 3) makes detailed provisions for subsidised subscription and other costs for people with disabilities based on age, level of disaibility, income and so on.  The Electronic Communications Act of 2005 implemented EU Directives and included specific rules on provision of special tariff conditions (“social tariffs”) to certain categories of beneficiaries. It is not clear to what extent, if any, the Act of 2005 and the subsequent regulatory activities have affected existing affordability provisions for disabled users under the 1991 Law and its regulations.

The Belgian Institute for Post and Telecommunications (IBPT) is the independent regulatory authority for telecoms. In 2002 IBPT made suggestions concerning:

1. the future evolution of universal service and people with disabilities in relation to new quality criteria ( e.g. to ensure the accessibility of phone boxes for people with visual, hearing or intellectual disabilities and those with reduced mobility)
2. the inclusion of mobile phone services in the provisions to be made available to disabled people and to allow the current social service provision for telephones to apply to either mobile or fixed line
3. making internet access easier and cheaper for disabled people as part of the social services that are included under universal services
4. the recommendation regarding the accessibility of public phone boxes to disabled people

The Consultative Committee of Telecommunications was created under the existing universal service law in order to advise the IBPT and the Minister of Telecommunications on all issues concerning telecom services, telephone service provision and universal service. Following the recommendations of the IBPT, in 2004 the Committee considered the recommendation regarding the accessibility of public phone boxes for disabled people. However, the universal service operator has apparently asked for a modification of universal service obligations in order to remove public phone boxes from these obligations because of their decreasing use since the uptake of mobile phones. Overall, it is not clear whether any of these issues have been progressed either in the context of the Electronic Communications Act of 2005 or in other ways.

There is also an Ombudsman service for telecommunications. Any unsatisfied client of a telecom operator can ask for intervention from the “telecom mediator”, who can act either as a mediator between concerned parties, or as a referee when a complaint is registered. In its annual report 2002, the Ombudsman service noted an increasing number of complaints related to equality principles coming from, among others, people with disabilities.

Other initiatives

Although there is no accessible directory service, the universal servive operator (Belgacom) offers discounts for calling its 1207 directory service to clients that are visually or motor disabled. They can make up to five free calls per month to the 1207 number; after that, there is a special discount.

Teletolk (“Tele-interpreter”) is an online relay service for people with hearing and speech impairments in Flanders, provided by a government agency (Contactpunt Vlaanderen). Teletolk was first started in 2000 when the relay service could be called using Minitel (French interactive videotex). In 2004, the Flemish government decided to switch to an online relay service. Any deaf, hard of hearing or speech impaired person who has a computer and internet connection can use this free service. Using a chat facility, the caller interacts with a Tele-interpreter who calls the person they want to reach and mediates between them.

To avoid SPAM-abuse of the e-mail address the ‘@’ sign was written as ‘a t’ and each dot ‘.’ as ‘d o t’.
Please change the recipient address of your message accordingly. We apologize for this inconvenience.