The Flemish parties have finally managed to find a coalition with a view to forming a Brussels government, but the PS refuses to join forces with the N-VA and blocks the negotiation.
Today, a certain number of planets are aligned to encourage, in Flanders, to say that we must take care of the institutional status of Brussels, with the desire for partial co-management by Flanders and Wallonia. The state of Brussels’ finances encourages them to move in this direction.
The note from the Dutch-speaking Brussels trainer, Elke Van den Brant (Groen), recommends the merger of municipalities, CPAS, and police zones. What does this inspire you?
What Elke Van den Brandt’s Brussels “supernota” contains, with strong institutional overtones
A Flemish unity is emerging around the note from trainer Elke Van den Brandt (Groen). It reveals demands that have been in the air for a long time, and touches on the matrix of Brussels construction in 1989: the 19 municipalities, police zones, etc. It is absolutely necessary for French-speaking Brussels residents to have a strategy to defend Brussels and its interests. What we have before us are not minor elements in the destiny of Belgium… Weakening the Brussels Region would mean weakening an essential link in the unity of the country. We do not sufficiently appreciate the vulnerability in which Brussels finds itself.
Brussels risks becoming a sub-region managed by Flanders and Wallonia?
Yes, we are talking about 2 + 2 (Editor’s note: Brussels and the German-speaking community would only be sub-regions of Flanders and Wallonia), about partial co-management. The Region could also once again become an entity under close federal supervision. Francophones must very quickly adjust their strategy. But something worries me. Good negotiations depend in particular on the good quality of interpersonal relationships. What we no longer see today…
But basically, does Elke Van den Brandt’s note worry you?
The note contains some fairly explosive elements. But I find, as Christophe De Beukelaer (leader of the Engagés) says, that we must first of all talk to each other.
gullTo say that we do not want to speak with the N-VA, as Ahmed Laaouej seems to say, cThis means exposing yourself to people saying that Brussels does not want to talk with Flanders. The N-VA is still the leading party in Belgium.”
The PS refuses to start negotiations in Brussels with Groen, the N-VA, the Open VLD and Vooruit: “The conditions are clearly not met”
Is the PS right to veto the N-VA?
To say that we do not want to speak with the N-VA, as Ahmed Laaouej (president of the Brussels PS) seems to say, is to expose ourselves to the risk of saying that Brussels does not want to speak with Flanders and that French-speakers in Brussels are contesting the legitimacy of the election result. The N-VA is still the leading party in Belgium… This goes in the direction of a blockage which will have consequences for Brussels, as well as for relations between the two communities. In addition, there is the risk of seeing a trap close. Because the observation of the blockage of the Brussels Region benefits the Flemings, who can then say: “This thing is ungovernable.” Should we nevertheless concede essential things to Dutch speakers? No. But we must sit around a table in order to analyze what is really on the menu of the note: to see what we must reject and what we can obtain in terms of concession. On Beliris for example, but also on the establishment of the metropolitan community.
According to Ridouane Chahid (PS), the NV-A means “the paralysis and placing under supervision of the Brussels Region”.
The attitude of the Brussels PS could lock us into a total blockage… But I think that Ahmed Laaouej does not want to endanger the future of Brussels. He is a realistic man and he must understand that the refusal to discuss with the N-VA could lead to uniting the Flemings in a long-term blocking strategy. And then, are we sure that it was only the N-VA that inspired Elke Van den Brandt’s note in its most undrinkable advances?
gullAhmed Laaouej has the skills to be a statesman, but he must change his costume. He was a convincing federal parliamentarian. He must now take on the costume of a unifier to embody Brussels and its defense.”
Can Ahmed Laaouej embody the new strong man of the Brussels Region, for the PS?
He has the skills and qualities to be a statesman, but he needs to change his costume. He was a convincing federal parliamentarian. He must now take on the costume of a unifier to embody Brussels and its defense. To do this, he must establish peaceful relationships with his partners, the MR and the Engagés. I know that he is often very annoyed by the outings of Georges-Louis Bouchez (president of the MR). But I advise him not to join in the response to provocations.
Should the CPAS be merged, as recommended in the note?
Between clientelism, social fraud and poor management, the Anderlecht CPAS scandal highlights worrying practices
Such a merger of CPAS cannot represent an advantage for the population, because decentralization tools will be required for these CPAS in any case. If we want to control the CPAS without merging them, it is possible via the bicommunity powers of the Region.
The Brussels PS seems to minimize the extent of the problems observed at the Anderlecht CPAS…
I can’t join you on this…
Lotfi Mostefa, president of the Anderlecht CPAS, refused to appear at the hearings before the Chamber…
This is unacceptable.
Should we merge the 19 Brussels municipalities as recommended by the “super note”?
We can do partial mergers, and ultimately end up with 6 to 10 territories. It’s not a taboo. But we must keep the municipalities as a rear base, to still be able to administer the capital in the event of a community blockage.
Was the PS right to open the majority to the PTB in several cities, including Forest?
I belong to a generation that felt and experienced the failure of the communist model. But what concerns me more is the fear that the PTB could be the big beneficiary of the alliances with the PS. We can fear a permanent escalation between PS and PTB, in the field of social policies. The PTB will never be designated as responsible for poor management, since it is always the figure of the mayor who is the recipient of criticism. We must also be very sensitive to the economic dynamics of Brussels. I am a social democrat, and I think we should distribute wealth. But for that, there must be some wealth left…
Related News :