gull“For low and middle earners, the increase in income will be canceled out by a whole series of tax increases”
You analyzed the leaked notes. What is your state of mind regarding the measures envisaged by the five negotiating parties?
Very worried. The right-wing parties repeat that we must “reward work”. In reality, they want to do the opposite. The tax reform on the table (Editor's note: increase in the tax-exempt portion, revisions of the brackets and employment bonuses) allows a modest increase of €150 per month for low and medium salaries, canceled by taxes, the freezing of wages or modification of the index. On the other hand, someone who earns €8,000 to €10,000 could actually earn €1,000 more per month! This is what makes their budget exercise complicated.
The fact remains that with unchanged policy, the budgetary outlook is poor…
Arizona wants to find 18 billion over five years. It's not the Himalayas. In the last year of Vivaldi, we did better. They also weigh down the boat with expenses. Even if some are legitimate, such as investments in the police and justice. Or even in Defense. But for the latter, I think we must tell the European Commission that it must not enter into the budgetary trajectory.
Can we take these expenses out of the budget? Isn't this budget makeup?
Of course ! Look at the Walloon budget… Taking this spending out of the trajectory is important, because we cannot spend more on defense and have to make savings on health care or pensions. It is legitimate that these expenses should not be borne by pensioners and the sick. And if we do not carry out a tax reform which mainly benefits the richest and which costs 10 billion, we obtain a plan that is easier to achieve.
To help low and middle earners, what would you do?
We proposed a progressive tax reform, offering an additional €300 net per month to low and middle earners, without compensation via taxes. It was financed by a contribution from the profits of multinationals and by a tax on big fortunes.
Given the situation, should we still not make structural savings? A sort of “downsizing” of the State?
You can always save money. But no one wants fewer magistrates, police officers or money for health. Then, I always hated the expression “degreasing”. Firstly because she is grossophobic. Then, it leaves the impression that civil servants and the State are overweight. However, investing in health means enabling staff to do their job well and patients to be well cared for. Investing in security means having enough police officers on the streets. Finally, investing in SNCB means having enough trains.
“It should come as no surprise that these measures provoke negative reactions”
In the event of a blockage in the negotiations, could the PS take its responsibilities? In De Zondag, Elio Di Rupo argued that Arizona was not the only option.
He expressed a very personal opinion. The entire party office decided, after the elections, to go into opposition. But the PS is a responsible party. If there was a systemic, health or financial crisis, and we were asked to participate in a government, we would not refuse. But the right won, let it govern!
With these endless negotiations, doesn't the N-VA want to prove through the absurd that Belgium is ungovernable?
Anyone who fails to form a government is in a bad position to criticize the functioning of the system. If you mess up a béarnaise sauce, you can't say that béarnaise is an impossible sauce to prepare. It's because you simply aren't capable of doing it. It's not the same thing.
Arizona has not yet been formed and yet actions have been announced. Are the unions not reacting a little early?
Since we voted, we have seen a series of notes. And at the moment, there is not a single national strike. Just targeted actions, particularly in sectors like education where there are already full-fledged governments. But if this federal government achieves everything that is in the notes, including deregulation of workers' rights, two billion savings on the backs of pensioners, nine billion on public services or even six billion in new taxes, It should come as no surprise that this provokes negative reactions.
In Wallonia, the PS is critical of the budget…
First, the Walloon government does almost no budgetary consolidation. They announce an effort of 268 million euros. But in reality, if we look at the real cost of their measures, they are in negative balance for 2025. They are making the situation worse and transferring everything to the municipalities. Some will have to increase their taxes… And it will be the fault of the MR and the Engagés.
“The question of the name of the party is raised. But we will remain socialists”
The PS is launching a process of refoundation. Would you like to draw inspiration from the approach initiated by Maxime Prévot with Les Engagés?
No, it's more about achieving what Vooruit set out to do. Compared to the Engagés, this process will be more civic and participatory. We want to open dialogue by leveraging modern technologies, such as artificial intelligence, and democratic innovations such as citizen panels. We also want to rely on our activists, who constitute our roots, in order to modernize our message on several major themes.
Will it be a real transformation, or a change of facade, like a move towards a name such as En avant or Les Socialistes?
I said that the name of the party could even be debated. You must be able to do an exercise without taboos. But we will remain socialists.
The formation of the Brussels government is blocked because the PS refuses to ally with the N-VA. David Leisterh wants the national presidents to take part in the discussions.
The PS interlocutor for the negotiations is and remains Ahmed Laaouej. Brussels socialists have always negotiated for Brussels since the beginning of the Brussels region; Philippe Moureaux negotiated, Laurette Onkelinx then and Ahmed Laaouej today. However, we are surprised by the MR's exit because they have not contacted the socialist negotiators for 3 weeks. Finally, the N-VA represents 2% of Brussels residents, and they cannot impose their vision on others.
On this subject, we had an incident in the House because a train attendant dared to say “Goeiemorgen – Hello” in Vilvoorde. Which is considered by Sammy Mahdi (CD&V) as a scandalous attack on the linguistic integrity of Flanders. It's mind-blowing. Is this really the world we want to live in? We are in the 21st century.
Is it the return of the CD&V “taped” to the N-VA?
At the CD&V, I didn't feel they were all very comfortable about their president's exit. On the other hand, he was applauded by the N-VA and Vlaams Belang. But should we rekindle community and linguistic wars?
Was the Anderlecht CPAS affair exploited in relation to the Brussels negotiations?
This affair has been completely exploited. And the press talked about it more than Didier Reynders' lottery tickets. Even if I never comment on a judicial investigation in progress.
He said it too…
On the EU-Mercosur agreement
“Belgium must oppose the free trade agreement between Mercosur and the European Union. There are favorable parties in Flanders because they perhaps have a different agriculture. In Wallonia, agriculture remains fundamentally family with small farms And in Brazil, you have mega-beef factories, which use phytosanitary products. It's completely unfair competition. What's more, it's ecological absurdity. coffee and chocolate is very good. We don't have the climate to produce it. But importing beef or poultry makes no sense.
The new Mons station and its cost of 480 million euros
“It was a decision taken by the SNCB at the time. And it must be remembered that this station cost much less than that of Antwerp, which we never talk about. In Charleroi, I asked for functional arrangements. Personally, I don't like Calatrava's architecture at all. When I leave Venice station, I hate its horrible footbridge over the grand canal. But for Mons, it has nothing to do with it. I repeat, it was SNCB which chose it.” G.BARK.
