When At Us arrives at their house…
219 days after the election, liberal voices are once again publicly raised against Georges-Louis Bouchez, accused, as in the past, of making numerous decisions alone.
The affiliation of ex-members of the small far-right group At Us is at the heart of the malaise. Noa Pozzi, former head of the party’s list in the province of Liège, joined the liberal ranks and was photographed alongside Georges-Louis Bouchez during the MR’s vows. An affiliation initially refused, but which, five months after the first request, was finally validated by a decision by Georges-Louis Bouchez.
“In accordance with our statutes, he has publicly committed to renouncing his past commitments and to adhering to our values”defended Georges-Louis Bouchez on the social networkOur goal must be to bring people back into the democratic fold and not the other way around. This operation has already been carried out with PTB activists for example.”
Revealed by Sudinfothis affiliation triggered a wave of indignation. If the left-wing parties strongly denounced this decision, it also raised many questions within the MR itself. Diana Nikolic, leader of the Liège liberals and MP, spoke bluntly on social networks: “I confirm that the Liège liberals were neither consulted nor informed regarding Noa Pozzi’s membership in the MR. I can only regret it.”
And Noa Pozzi would not be the only new member of the MR from At Us. Two other former members of the far-right party would have joined the sections in Picardy Wallonia. This provoked reactions of astonishment in certain local sections, as well as within the Circle of Liberal Students of the ULB.
To justify their support, Georges-Louis Bouchez explained, in Le Soir, that “They’re 20 year olds.” et “that at that age, Jean Gol was among the communist students.” Words that made Déborah Gol, Jean Gol’s daughter, jump: “I would like him to stop invoking my father’s name and insulting his memory by comparing his career to that of candidates from a movement that he so abhorred, particularly as the grandson of deported.”
The tackle by Sophie Wilmès
After a weekend of negotiations, Georges-Louis Bouchez had to face a new round of criticism coming from Sophie Wilmès.
Guest of Facing Buxant on RTL-tvi, the former Prime Minister, who received 543,821 preference votes during the European elections, did not mince her words. Behind the scenes, it is said that the relations between the two figures of the MR are “icy”. This intervention seems to confirm this tension.
Sophie Wilmès first questioned the ability of Georges-Louis Bouchez to combine the presidency of the MR with a position in a future government. A combination, prohibited by the party statutes, envisaged behind the scenes. Some argue that Bart De Wever would refuse to lead a government whose decisions would be, like under Alexander De Croo’s Vivaldi, constantly torpedoed from the outside by presidents.
“I was Deputy Prime Minister, and I can guarantee you that this position requires total mobilization. It’s a job 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, or almost. I don’t think it’s compatible with the presidency of a party”she said to Martin Buxant.
A combination which also leaves the Walloon Minister-President, Adrien Dolimont, skeptical. “I wouldn’t know how to do it.”he said on Bel RTL. “Already holding a double hat at the Wallonia-Brussels Federation, I must admit that it is very complicated.”
On the arrival of former members of At UsSophie Wilmès was just as incisive: “I can understand that over the course of life, we can change our minds. But in such a special case, we should have consulted internally.”
Stung, Bouchez left the negotiations
Sophie Wilmès’ comments did not fail to make Georges-Louis Bouchez react. Annoyed by this outing, he left the ongoing negotiations this Sunday evening.
“He left in a fit of mood”we confirm behind the scenes. “But we must also link this departure to the tax debate, which is particularly tense. And Georges-Louis Bouchez was back for the resumption of negotiations this Monday at 1 p.m., as agreed.”
Will the president of the MR have to counter waves of criticism, as before the June election? It should be noted that if the municipal elections were synonymous with good results, some liberals are bitter about the “second tour”namely discussions with other parties, particularly in the Brussels region or in the province of Walloon Brabant.
To this must be added the declarations of the president of the MR on the usefulness of a Minister of Culture which also displeased. Will these resentments be expressed more in the public square? The results of the Arizona negotiations at the end of January will likely be decisive.
