“It is not correct to say that the State is living beyond its means”

You have launched a long-term movement. But isn’t this drawing too quickly, when we don’t yet know much about the content of the future government agreement?

It’s the chicken or the egg. If we wait too long, people will ask us why we didn’t act sooner. From the few reports we have of the ongoing negotiations, we are talking about 20 to 21 billion euros in savings, without new revenue. This means strong attacks on public services, difficulties in financing non-profit services while the system is breaking down. This is not the way to follow when we will have to invest enormously in the years to come.

Crowd success at the non-profit demonstration: “The government will have to find ways to invest in healthcare workers”, replies Vandenbroucke

You say that there will be no new recipes. But, from what we know of the federal negotiations, it is a question of seeking additional resources from the “broader shoulders”. This is also one of the points of friction between negotiators.

We’ll see. If so, great, but we don’t see anything concrete at the moment. On the other hand, on savings, things are clearer.

Which savings worry you most?

A little bit of all. We can clearly see that public services are in the crosshairs, as if, by definition, public sector agents were profiteers. Health care too, or the limitation of unemployment benefits over time. It’s true that we don’t yet have a lot of information on the measurements. But the goal of our action is to attract attention, to say that we are broke in certain sectors, that we will not be able to go and get money there.

According to the Arizona parties, the country is living beyond its means and must make significant savings to clean up its public finances and avoid a Greek scenario. Do you hear this message or does it seem exaggerated?

It seems exaggerated to me, for two reasons. One: we grant subsidies to fossil fuels to the tune of 12 billion euros per year. Two: 11 billion euros per year are paid to companies in the form of wage subsidies and reductions in social security contributions. All of this no longer appears in the state accounts since it is less revenue. If we add these two items together, we should not look for 21 billion in savings… Today, we look at the state budget with revenues and expenditures, but we do not look at what does not fit in. in state coffers. This is a truncated way of presenting the budget. I think it is not correct to say that we are living beyond our means.

In your opinion, these two big items (subsidies for fossil fuels and reductions in social security contributions) should be reduced?

What we are asking is that everything be put on the table, including these two elements.

Do you also think that we should look for additional recipes?

Yes, it is necessary. To ensure an economic, digital and ecological transition trajectory, massive investments will be necessary. Everyone knows it. This is the meaning of the Draghi report (on the competitiveness of the European Union). We know full well that we must invest and therefore that we must seek additional revenue.

Dr Draghi presents his prescription to cure Europe’s serious competitiveness problems

How could the union movement that you launched on Friday evolve?

For the moment, we are in a state of awareness since the negotiations are underway and we do not know many concrete elements. We are in a phase where we are reminded of our priorities. We did it on Friday on budgetary issues. We will do it in January on the question of pensions which is one of the major points included in the notes put on the table by the Arizona parties.

If your fears materialize, will you toughen up the movement, through general strikes for example.

It’s even.

Is your hope a change of direction in the policies envisaged or a change of coalition?

The coalition that is there today is the coalition resulting from the polls. It is normal for the parties that won the elections to sit around the table to form a government. Above all, we plead for new directions. It is not by overwhelming a part of the population, by mistreating it, that we manage to strengthen social cohesion, that we manage to move a country, that we manage to channel energies to achieve the objectives of development of territories, the transition objectives that we need. When we see the number of long-term patients, we feel that the discomfort is very significant among the population. It is not by reinforcing this uneasiness, by stigmatizing one or the other, that we create a positive vision of the future.

Thierry Bodson tackles Arizona: “This is a fundamental attack on democracy”

Within Arizona, the N-VA and the MR would like to reduce the influence of intermediary bodies (unions, mutual societies, etc.). Have the parties closest to you – Engagés, CD&V, Vooruit – given you guarantees as to the role that social consultation will still play?

The note from trainer Bart De Wever (N-VA) plans to determine a framework that is so narrow to the social partners that it will become complicated to sit around the table. It’s as if the cards were already dealt before.

You did not answer the question: did you receive wages from Engagés, CD&V and Vooruit?

No, I can’t say that.