Belgian Politics & Elections: Federal, regional & EP elections on June 9, 2024

[Zinneke]

The party composition was agreed beforehand but negotiations are finally concluded for a Flemish government today. One stumbling block was trying to find a Brussels -based minister (which is a legal obligation due to the Flemish government taking Dutch speaking Community competences under its wing). VLD Brussels veterans Guy Vanhengel and Sven Gatz (both more social liberals) joined the Brussels government without consent from their Flemish branch that wanted to turn to the right. It will be interesting to see who gets the portfolio.   


Also, in the MR there is now a battle being waged for power after Reynders and Michel both left for European functions. So far there is a strange powerplay going on between the Provinces and within them because apparently MR are considering having a more balanced co-presidency to avoid the French style personality warfare, and the tensions that the PS have between their provincial branches (Hainaut, Liège and Brussels usually tussle for influence within a Francophone party). luck has it though that two eminent figures of their hard right, Denis Ducarme and Georges-Louis Bouchez, are in open warfare against each other in Hainaut. The former had one of his protégés leak Bouchez reprimanding a member of his "Mons en Mieux" list for backing a motion with MR asking for a more progressive liberalism. Its unknown who exactly will incarnate what is left of MR's "social liberal" wing - which was the official party line under both Reynders and Michel for a while, but rumour has it it could be Eupen-based federal deputy Kattrin Jadin. Other potential candidates are Sophie Wilmès (very technocratic style) or Phillippe Goffin. Ducarme is the slight favorite.

[Zinneke]

How close are we to a government?  Belgium I think holds record for longest government formation of 583 days so any chance this record might be broken or is that likely to hold?

We are nowhere near close but not because of the previous crisis reasoning, where NVA and PS were basically put into a room and told to get a deal when none of them wanted that at that time (now might be different). Its mainly because there are like 6 parties that have to elect Presidents and it suits no one for the moment to commit to anything on the federal level (because being constructive and compromise in a clown world where VB gets 20% is impossible), so we are basically waiting for them to solve their internal squabbles that are usually solved by backroom deals anyway (cfr ECOLO or MR who today said they expect to "coronate" Georges-Louis Bouchez after Michel struck a deal with the barons of the party...never mind the fact that he ran their worst campaign in almost a generation).

Anyway the  new Flemish regional government are already trying ot wrestle competences/agencies such as internal security, the human rights watch organisation and the quotas for medical students (all federal competences) from the highest level so we're heading for state breakup. None of the francophones have any balls to talk about institutional matters, to tell Flanders to have their cake and eat it with a referendum on independence, no no, that would be far too clever for us dumbos.

[Zinneke]

Leadership elections are underway :

MR have the most competitive one. Although Georges Louis-Bouchez (of Mons) has official support from both old barons of the party (Michel and Reynders), there are left-wing challengers in the form of Christine Defraigne (of Liège), and Phillippe Goffin (of Cresneux, near Liège), both of whom are true to their Province and are social liberals. The token Brusselite is Clémentine Barzin, who is close to the Reynders clan, with some suggesting Reynders is not actually that happy with the coronation of "GLB". Completing the set is GLB's now arch-rival in Hainaut Denis Ducarme, who wants to be the "Walloon Francken" but is a loyal foot soldier of MR. GLB is given as a winner but he's got to justify how effective he will be.  

Défi have a 4 way battle between two ex-PS card carriers, one ex- Institute Jean Gol (MR think tank) philosopher, and some crank from Luxemburg. The philosopher is Emmanuel De Bock who wants to distance the party from its traditional roots and focus on social liberalism, trying to profit from MR's veering to the right. The young challengers are Christophe Magdalijns who is part of the "pragmatic" wing of the now retired Didier Gosuin, and the more social, young, female,  (and Walloon, for once) Julie Leclerq, who wants the party to run in FLanders - and not as a Francophone interests group. Lastly there is Jean-Claude Cremer, who runs the Luxemburgish provincial wing of Défi, which must be a fun pass-time. De Bock has the intelligentsia, Le Soir reading francophone liberal support, Leclerq seems to fit the better mould for #woke Défi, but Magdalijns might crucially have a better ground game because of Gosuin's support.  

PS : With Elio Di Rupo gone after almost 2 decades at the head of the Walloon-Brussels party of government and behemoth, it was CETA celebrity, ex-PoSci professor Paul Magnette who was elected unopposed. No surprises here, although something must have been promised at the federal level to Jean-Claude Marcourt and the Liègeois PS, who tend to prefer mandates over presidencies.

Groen had their election and Meryem Almaci was elected with tandem partner Dany Neudt after two rounds following a challenge from her "realo"-right. Bjorn Rzoska fought a campaign with Rina Rabau on "not guilt tripping" the core Flemish vote and wanting to take government responsibility. He pushed for an alliance with N-VA at Provincial level in East Flanders.

CD&V's leadership election is a sh**teshow judging by the fact that a guy most famous for playing a garden gnome in a tv-cum-theme park attraction is the candidacy generating the most headlines. I'll complete it when its done (or Laki) but its the one that's garnering the most media attention north of the border.

[Zinneke]

You have got to understand that VB only support these measures because their entire political philosophy was so much in the gutter for so many years that they can get away with pretty much supporting any policy left, right or center.

I infinitely prefer, as a leftist, a Conservative with principles like De Wever to an arsonist demagogue like Van Grieken who support a left-wing policy once in a blue moon to show he "cares" about poor people.

[Zinneke]

Sophie Wilmès will replace Charles Michel as Prime Minister. First woman prime minister in Belgian history.

[Zinneke]

Do you mean the Humanist Democratic Center? cdH?

[Zinneke]

Do you mean the Humanist Democratic Center? cdH?

Yes them (though I did read about them in previous pages).

CdH abandoned its Christian and conservative, in order to become more relevant to immigrant communities by becoming a "humanist" party.

Now most people basically see them as a wishy washy party that doesn't really stand for anything.

Under Joëlle Milquet they were for all intents and purposes a left-wing party which lost them their old conservative vote, and then in the last few years they tried to pivot right again but it didn't get them their old conservative voters back and it just lost them their left-wing voters acquired during the Milquet years.

That explains their electoral collapse during the last election.

Basically in Wallonia and Brussels if you're non left-wing you vote MR (Mouvement Réformateur). And it's basically been that way since the 2000s.

Flanders has far more options in terms of parties for right-wingers.

Correct, particularly this part. MCC's defection from the Christian Social Party back in the 90s in return of the PRL abandoning its crusade (for lack of a better word) on the Catholic hold on education, effectively ensured traditional conservatives have been voting MR for ages now, although you do meet some relics who just blindly vote cdH.

[Zinneke]

Do you mean the Humanist Democratic Center? cdH?

Yes them (though I did read about them in previous pages).

CdH abandoned its Christian and conservative, in order to become more relevant to immigrant communities by becoming a "humanist" party.

Now most people basically see them as a wishy washy party that doesn't really stand for anything.

Under Joëlle Milquet they were for all intents and purposes a left-wing party which lost them their old conservative vote, and then in the last few years they tried to pivot right again but it didn't get them their old conservative voters back and it just lost them their left-wing voters acquired during the Milquet years.

That explains their electoral collapse during the last election.

Basically in Wallonia and Brussels if you're non left-wing you vote MR (Mouvement Réformateur). And it's basically been that way since the 2000s.

Flanders has far more options in terms of parties for right-wingers.

Correct, particularly this part. MCC's defection from the Christian Social Party back in the 90s in return of the PRL abandoning its crusade (for lack of a better word) on the Catholic hold on education, effectively ensured traditional conservatives have been voting MR for ages now, although you do meet some relics who just blindly vote cdH.

Yeah that was the beginning of the end for the PSC. MCC defected in what? 1998?

So in 1999 PSC did very badly as they lost their more economically right-wing voters to PRL (1999 was PSC/CdH's worst result before 2019 I believe, and I think it was still a considerably better result than their 2019 one if I recall correctly). What was the reason for MCC? Infighting between Gerard Deprez and the rest of the party? And what were the disagreements over?

After that Joelle Milquet took over the party and decided the only way to remain relevant was to ditch the Christianity and social/cultural conservatism in order to appeal to non Christians, hence the party name change in 2002. I believe the social/cultural conservatives in the party left after that for the most part (except old people in Luxembourg province), but those voters got replaced by new voters from immigrant communities in Brussels and moderately left-wing voters in Wallonia. Who then bolted after CdH decided to back MR in the Walloon government in 2018.

I may be wrong, but I think a big reason MR voted against legalizing gay marriage in 2003 while their VLD counterparts in Flanders voted for it was in order to get the votes of those PSC voters who felt alienated by Milquet. And it seems to have worked. MR really became a force in Wallonia in the mid 2000s, and I'm guessing right-wing defections from PSC/CdH is perhaps the main factor that got them there.

You are right, but MR had their best result in 2007 (only time they have beaten the PS in ages) and that's partly due to Reynders actually moving away from those topics and running a campaign that didn't spook the centre-left and talked about maintaining social liberal values (against immigration). But then there was also the Charleroi corruption scandals.
 

Sophie Wilmès will replace Charles Michel as Prime Minister. First woman prime minister in Belgian history.

It's more symbolic, because this government can't do much. It's all about the next government.

I'd assume there's almost no chance of the next PM (non-caretaker) being from MR?

Yeah this is just symbolic.

I think the next PM will be Flemish.

Next PM will be Flemish yeah. Liberal family will still be largest as far as I can tell.

And how is the government formation process coming along?

Better than expected. There was talk of an early government formation for a while at the start of the month.
Now Rudy Demotte (PS) and Geert Bourgeois (N-VA) are formateurs.
They have invited the Greens back but I think ECOLO will sit out while Groen will support it because the Flemish parties (including sp.a) do not like ECOLO. At all.

[Zinneke]

Do you mean the Humanist Democratic Center? cdH?

Yes them (though I did read about them in previous pages).

CdH abandoned its Christian and conservative, in order to become more relevant to immigrant communities by becoming a "humanist" party.

Now most people basically see them as a wishy washy party that doesn't really stand for anything.

Under Joëlle Milquet they were for all intents and purposes a left-wing party which lost them their old conservative vote, and then in the last few years they tried to pivot right again but it didn't get them their old conservative voters back and it just lost them their left-wing voters acquired during the Milquet years.

That explains their electoral collapse during the last election.

Basically in Wallonia and Brussels if you're non left-wing you vote MR (Mouvement Réformateur). And it's basically been that way since the 2000s.

Flanders has far more options in terms of parties for right-wingers.

Correct, particularly this part. MCC's defection from the Christian Social Party back in the 90s in return of the PRL abandoning its crusade (for lack of a better word) on the Catholic hold on education, effectively ensured traditional conservatives have been voting MR for ages now, although you do meet some relics who just blindly vote cdH.

Why not a religious centrist, moderate, left coalition or support a socially conservative/justice vision or there's no audience for that? If you're an MR voter, do you need be both types of conservative/right leaning or may it be somewhat possible to be little/moderate/somewhat left on economic and fiscal issues?

Yes, its easy to identify a couple of MR figures with the profile I think you are trying to draw (Willy Borsus for one). But Americans here on general just need to understand that issues such as religion's place in society, abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage etc. are just about non-issues for large swathes of European electorates, including self-declared Christians. Belgium is not different. Its a heavily culturally catholic country, with a very strong catholic pillar and catholic genealogy that can explain a lot of good and bad characteristics about Belgium. But that's about it. 

The economic cleavage dominates in francophone Belgium especially. That's not to say MR have a radically different economic program to PS (they are after all in coalition together at the Walloon region). But your socio-economic status usually determines how you vote. cdH were by definition in Wallonia a party of rural economic renewal, dominating in Luxemburg province, and of associative governance models with a trade unions that targeted certain sections of the working class.

Prévot is trying to re-invent them into something a bit different now that they are in opposition, but encounters resistance.

[Zinneke]

I agree apart from one thing - cdH are still a "factor" - its thanks to them we have a weird coalition in Wallonia of MR, ECOLO and PS. Despite consistently declining over the last 20 if not 30 years they have always been a kingmaker as such, even when they decide to opt out. The last 4 changes of Walloon government have effectively formed on the basis of cdH changing course. Which is frightening.

He is trying to re-invent them into the Maxime Prévot party. Taking a leaf out of a certain politician down south
The difference is, Prévot is nowhere near as shrewd, competent, communicative or intelligent as Macron. And he didn't found the party so the old guard are left and they are usually mayors in the kind of places cdH relies on.

[Zinneke]

They still exist in both countries yes, but church goers are on the decline. In politics, Wouter Beke is an example though of a prominent practicing Catholic.
Belgium is very much a Catholic country while in the Netherlands its only the South where there is or used to be heavy catholic majorities (its one of the main cleavages that led to the Belgo-Dutch split).

There is virtually no pro-life movement with any weight. Vlaams Belang are the most socially conservative party but most of their new electorate especially don't even know this.

[Zinneke]

Hahaha Mahdi on the left on immigration? Maybe on the Flemish spectrum, but then again he is from BXL

Do you mean the Humanist Democratic Center? cdH?

Yes them (though I did read about them in previous pages).

CdH abandoned its Christian and conservative, in order to become more relevant to immigrant communities by becoming a "humanist" party.

Now most people basically see them as a wishy washy party that doesn't really stand for anything.

Under Joëlle Milquet they were for all intents and purposes a left-wing party which lost them their old conservative vote, and then in the last few years they tried to pivot right again but it didn't get them their old conservative voters back and it just lost them their left-wing voters acquired during the Milquet years.

That explains their electoral collapse during the last election.

Basically in Wallonia and Brussels if you're non left-wing you vote MR (Mouvement Réformateur). And it's basically been that way since the 2000s.

Flanders has far more options in terms of parties for right-wingers.

Correct, particularly this part. MCC's defection from the Christian Social Party back in the 90s in return of the PRL abandoning its crusade (for lack of a better word) on the Catholic hold on education, effectively ensured traditional conservatives have been voting MR for ages now, although you do meet some relics who just blindly vote cdH.

Why not a religious centrist, moderate, left coalition or support a socially conservative/justice vision or there's no audience for that? If you're an MR voter, do you need be both types of conservative/right leaning or may it be somewhat possible to be little/moderate/somewhat left on economic and fiscal issues?

Yes, its easy to identify a couple of MR figures with the profile I think you are trying to draw (Willy Borsus for one). But Americans here on general just need to understand that issues such as religion's place in society, abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage etc. are just about non-issues for large swathes of European electorates, including self-declared Christians. Belgium is not different. Its a heavily culturally catholic country, with a very strong catholic pillar and catholic genealogy that can explain a lot of good and bad characteristics about Belgium. But that's about it. 

The economic cleavage dominates in francophone Belgium especially. That's not to say MR have a radically different economic program to PS (they are after all in coalition together at the Walloon region). But your socio-economic status usually determines how you vote. cdH were by definition in Wallonia a party of rural economic renewal, dominating in Luxemburg province, and of associative governance models with a trade unions that targeted certain sections of the working class.

Prévot is trying to re-invent them into something a bit different now that they are in opposition, but encounters resistance.

Might I ask, how to help Wallonia?

I'm not sure what you mean? If cdH would help rural Wallonia? If I think they would help rural Wallonia?

[Zinneke]

I think though that Mahdi and the President of Plopsaland are beginning to touch upon an issue though, which is that Belgian society tends to segregate itself (it was the case when we had football clubs for the catholic pillar and for secular people for example, until it became financially unviable). And now (Greater) Brussels and Antwerp are clearly designed to ensure sections of society don't mix, which creates perceived racial segregation (and "entire districts gone to foreigners" perceptions) when really its a much more complex issue.

Mahdi of course is far more effective at communicating that in a more nuanced way, especially how its not about race, nor indeed an extension of some sort of Clash of Civilisation, but more about micro-cultural aspects.

As long as you have VB and Theo Francken monopolising the immigration issue though its going to be tough not to fall into "amalgames"...the Morroccan (largely Berber origin) kids in Molenbeek are third generation immigrants, I'm a second generation immigrant myself. We are as Belgian as each other...why they are amalgamated with Syrian refugees while I am not is where the racism really lies.

[Zinneke]

...the Morroccan (largely Berber origin) kids in Molenbeek are third generation immigrants, I'm a second generation immigrant myself. We are as Belgian as each other...why they are amalgamated with Syrian refugees while I am not is where the racism really lies.

Among the the second/third generation Immigrants, would you say is there a tendency to Identity strongly with the Country of Belgium and Belgian Unity or rather do they Identify as Flemish/Walloons? (or neither/with their country of origin?)

In Flanders, yes, clearly there is a "Belgian vote", and on npdata.be there is ample evidence for that, although its less traditional Belgian nationalism/Belgicist sentiment, more of a backlash movement against Flemish nationalism. It can vary according to communities though (it won't have escaped you in this thread that the Flemish nationalists love to play communitarian politics within immigrant communities, like in Genk).

In Wallonia and Brussels, its a non-issue. Identity is a non-issue in general. Integration is somewhat an issue, identity is never actually debated fully the way Flanders often descends into "Who is a Good Fleming?". The demographic history of Wallo Brux explains a lot about that.

I remember, in Britain Immigrants are likely to Identify with "British" as opposed to the Whites who identify as English, Welsh, etc. Is Fleming/Walloon similarly percieved to be a ethnic indicator?

Walloon and Brusseleir its very difficult to say yes. Already most Walloons don't identify with Wallonia : https://www.lecho.be/actualite/archive/En-depit-des-reformes-les-Wallons-s-identifient-peu-a-leur-Region/8652800

And Brussels is a city identity with its own characteristics

 Both are civic national identities and there is very little discussion about these topics there anyway. Di Rupo is hardly a Wallon de souche yet if you asked people here who is a famous Walloon he would come up quite quickly (alongside the likes of Nacer Chadli, for example).

 Fleming...depends...but in academia absolutely not. And in modern Fleming and Flemish nationalism has always meant "I'm a Dutch speaker before a French speaker in Belgium"...which gradually evolved into the territorial idea of Flanders as a unilingual entity you have now and the "Flemish minority" in Brussels. Technically Limburgers could be considered a different ethnicity to actual Flemings, but their Stockholm Syndrome the political evolution of Belgium dictates they consider themselves Flemish. Flemish identity can be very politically driven as a concept.

Do you think that the lack of a strong Belgian identity/patriotism is partly responsible for issues like Molenbeek?

Do you mean specifically the terrorism or the general delinquency perceived in these places?

No, for me its a failure of the relevant state institutions being able to act effectively that is the direct cause. Street policing, child services, education, internal intelligence, welfare (that left a gaping hole for the extremist "non-profits" to fill), etc. All of those things the Netherlands does better and it shows on our streets compared to theres...we are a ing freak show here in BXL but nobody wants to actually intervene.  

An indirect cause of this could be the dismantling and underfunding of state institutions caused by lack of strong Belgian patriotism. But I really don't get the very French argument that somehow this would have all been avoided if they had had laicité and patriotism classes at school or worse, military service...its like these people never met rebellious school kids.

[Zinneke]

Talks have broken down between N-VA and PS over the regionalisation of social security.

[Zinneke]

Results of first round presidency of MR :

Georges-Louis Bouchez : 6044
Ducarme : 3405
Goffin ; 1521
Defraigne : 1899
Barzin : 685

It will be Ducarme vs GLB. Pretty clear that the MR base is swinging rightwards.

[Zinneke]

Results of first round presidency of MR :

Georges-Louis Bouchez : 6044
Ducarme : 3405
Goffin ; 1521
Defraigne : 1899
Barzin : 685

It will be Ducarme vs GLB. Pretty clear that the MR base is swinging rightwards.

So what's the difference between them politically? And who would be a better leader for the party?

There is more a difference in style than in their ideas as both are on the right of the party. GLB is more socially liberal in the American sense I guess, he's not against good ideas if they come from the left of the party but he still hangs out with Francken, is hard on immigration,etc. He's got the support of Reynders, Michel and the rest of the barons., but he's definitely a maverick more than a manager who loves debating and provoking. But he's still learning I guess.

Ducarme is the kind of guy that attracts Destexhe voters. An older demographic . He's basically there to be a stone in the shoe of GLB as they both hate each other (refused to debate each other in the aftermath). The kind politician that thinks speaking with a raised voice on a debate platform is enough.

Ducarme definitely isn't a good fit for leader. GLB is clearly talented but he can also be a divisive figure and he ran their worst campaign for quite awhile in May.  Either way MR need to be careful they don't lose their loyal centrist voters to cdH/Défi . A lot of people who vote MR don't have time for big mouths, they just want someone to protect their tax rates.

[Zinneke]

Meanwhile in Flanders, there is typically more theatrical politics at play. First, the burning down of a protracted asylum seeker hostel in Bilzen, prompting internet comments wishing there were people in it.
Then there is a big debate over culture subsidies. N-VA announced proudly they would cut it massively and it has suddenly received an unlikely backlash in some parts.

sp.a have also elected a new president : Conner Rousseau, a young Flemish parliament member from Gent who is close to the Combrez wing of the party, so no real change in line of direction, other than trying to understand the "ok boomer" crowd better.

[Zinneke]

Results of first round presidency of MR :

Georges-Louis Bouchez : 6044
Ducarme : 3405
Goffin ; 1521
Defraigne : 1899
Barzin : 685

It will be Ducarme vs GLB. Pretty clear that the MR base is swinging rightwards.

So what's the difference between them politically? And who would be a better leader for the party?

There is more a difference in style than in their ideas as both are on the right of the party. GLB is more socially liberal in the American sense I guess, he's not against good ideas if they come from the left of the party but he still hangs out with Francken, is hard on immigration,etc. He's got the support of Reynders, Michel and the rest of the barons., but he's definitely a maverick more than a manager who loves debating and provoking. But he's still learning I guess.

Ducarme is the kind of guy that attracts Destexhe voters. An older demographic . He's basically there to be a stone in the shoe of GLB as they both hate each other (refused to debate each other in the aftermath). The kind politician that thinks speaking with a raised voice on a debate platform is enough.

Ducarme definitely isn't a good fit for leader. GLB is clearly talented but he can also be a divisive figure and he ran their worst campaign for quite awhile in May.  Either way MR need to be careful they don't lose their loyal centrist voters to cdH/Défi . A lot of people who vote MR don't have time for big mouths, they just want someone to protect their tax rates.

Who do you think will win? GLB?

Easily.

But the fact that there is a second round is a blow in itself to his credentials...hence why Ducarme was smug afterwards.

[Zinneke]

In Flanders, Walter De Donder (Kabouter Plop, The Mayor from Samson & Gert -> two child shows) and Sammy Mehdi are the favourites for CD&V. De Donder would be a turn to the right while Mehdi would be a turn to the left.

What exactly would that entail? Would a turn to the right mean moving closer to the N-VA (more economically liberal and nationalist) and a turn to the left becoming something like ChristenUnie?

They have a different purpose to both those parties, as they are a patrician party that seeks government to protect what remains of their pillar (the "Boerenbond", the mutuality, their hold on Flemish education, just to name a few examples). Some on the Right of the party want to distance themselves more from the Christian civil society actors to become NVA light but the garden gnome guy is still pretty traditional.

Also Mahdi is more right-wing than the ChristenUnie in general. I'd actually argue he's more right-wing than the incumbent Wouter Beke but I'm interested in what Laki thinks.

[Zinneke]

The garden gnome didn't get through the CD&V first round in the end. Joachim Coens will face off against Samy Mahdi. Coens is ACW so economically quite left-wing but socially he is keen on emphasising CD&Vs conservative credentials.

@mileslunn, in general liberals here are more right-wing . But it can vary.

[Zinneke]

GLB comfortably wins MR leadership second round 62-38 share against Ducarme, and already promotes Phillippe Goffin to Foreign Secretary.

[Zinneke]

De Clerq, Somers and other VLD progressives are supportive of the idea. They'd have a lot of influence unlike last time where MVA dominated the agenda through irregular tactics.

But I agree with De Wever that we should try to have a majority on both sides. Or move forward with a federal voting district, scrapping the constituencies, that way we have de jure federal parties and thus these coalitions would be easier. Won't happen though.

[Zinneke]

So Magnette handed in his resignation (technically he asks the King to not nominate him again) as Informateur which means that the door is still open for Purple-Green, but less open as previously thought about a week ago. Its clear both N-VA and CD&V are desperate to attack VLD on trying to sell out to the francophone left, but at the same time Purple-Green appears to be the only real solution (We could have told you this even before the election of course), because the Spanish experience has put a lot of people off the idea of fresh elections, and clearly N-VA-PS is not compatible. 

[Zinneke]

New polls show VB taking over NVA