Belgian Stalemate: King Prohibits Parliament from Convening, Prevents BHV Vote and Burka Ban
From the desk of Alexandra Colen on Fri, 2010-04-23 11:26
Belgium, the state of origin of EU president Herman Van Rompuy, is proving its status of non-country once again. For the fifth time since he was elected in 2007 the prime minister Yves Leterme, a Christian Democrat of Van Rompuy’s party, has either failed to put or keep a government together. Yesterday, he submitted his resignation to the King after one of his Flemish coalition parties, the Liberal VLD, withdrew from the government.
Leterme resigned after the umpteenth deadline had expired within which he had promised to settle the issue of the unconstitional electoral district of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde (generally referred to as BHV). All that is needed to settle this issue is a vote in parliament. At the committee level this vote has already been passed, with a majority voting to separate the Flemish (linguistically and territorially) towns of Halle and Vilvoorde from the electoral district of the bilingual capital of Brussels. To prevent the vote from being passed in the general assembly, the francophone parties of Wallonia and Brussels employed a number of procedures, buying time for the government to negotiate a “solution” where the Flemish would be put under pressure to make political, financial or territorial concessions to the francophones in exchange for a redrawing of BHV.
Leterme’s latest attempt failed, again because the francophone parties have no intention of settling the issue at all and are making demands that would undo five decades of careful constitutional reform and upset the precarious political balance. However, the monarchy has come to the rescue. After receiving Leterme, he refused to accept the resignation and immediately summoned the Speaker of the Belgian parliamant, Patrick Dewael, a member of the VLD, and put him under pressure not to convene parliament, and so to prevent any initiative that might lead to the BHV issue being tabled and voted in the general assembly.
By preventing Parliament from convening the King also thwarted the final vote on the burka ban, which was scheduled for yesterday.
See also:
Belgium Will Survive For Now, But Not For Long, 7 November 2007
I have another question
Submitted by Dr. D on Sun, 2010-04-25 04:06.
Will the Flemings put up with this foolishness forever, or is there some point where they will say, "enough"?
@ Dr. D
Submitted by traveller on Sun, 2010-04-25 09:46.
The Flemish misled "elite" was decapitated and at the least incapacitated after WWII. Some of them thought that nazi Germany would lead them to Independence which was extremely naive. This gave the Belgian establishment the unique chance of putting ten thousands of them in jail. Most were imprisoned and others were shot, even innocent ones like Dr. Borms who was against siding with the Germans, but he was to big a symbol.
Result, the so-called elite which succeeded them turned totally socialist and became establishment-slaves.
Meanwhile a very strong economic elite is growing which is fed up with the Belgian grabbing system on purely economic grounds. They are now the ones who timidly start taking initiatives, though totally ignored by the media.
My prediction: the Belgian system will commit economic suicide by blocking all initiatives and will create its own demise. Flemish and Walloon Independence will follow as sole alternative with a lot of problems and probably blood shedding about Brussels, a 19th century ungovernable monster with enormous structural problems.
Mo more war, walloons, and
Submitted by George2 on Sat, 2010-04-24 19:13.
Mo more war, walloons, and eddy wally.
Unilateral Declaration of Independence
Submitted by debendevan on Sat, 2010-04-24 15:08.
Given these facts, why hasn't the Flemish Parliament voted to separate? What is holding this artificial state together?
de bende van
@ debendevan
Submitted by traveller on Sat, 2010-04-24 17:01.
The political scene and the power of the unions, what's more the income of the unions, will be totally changed and drastically reduced.
The established parties derive an enormous amount of money from the present Belgian social security and jobless compensation system, they are the distributors and safekeepers of those massive amounts of money. In case of a Flemish Independence those money bags will be withdrawn from them.
Further the Walloon social compensation system, largely financed by the Flemish, is also in the hands of the political unions and again the Flemish unions will lose their share in that game.
You have to know that the established 3 parties have their established unions and social security organisations, inclusive our healthcare organisations.
In case of the Flemish Independence this gold hoard will be the first to escape them.
This system is the real safeguard of the Belgian grabbing politics.
Any more questions?
@ Traveller
Submitted by debendevan on Sun, 2010-04-25 14:51.
Thanks very much for the superb and concise response. It is frankly very depressing. I am from time to time a believer in the "Great Man" theory of history. My question is then who will be the "Great Man" who rouses the Flemings? Who will lead the Flemish from this current sterile situation to a new flowering of Flanders on the world stage?
de bende van
@ debendevan
Submitted by traveller on Sun, 2010-04-25 18:19.
My friend that's the whole question isn't it?
The Flemish are a marvellous but difficult people who have an ingrained genetic disgust for politicians since they have been betrayed for hundreds of years by every single political leader they trusted. Most of their leaders served foreign masters until this very day.
The charismatic honest leader who wants to change this feeling of distrust should have an exceptional personality. I don't see him right now. I base my hopes more on the stupidity of the Belgian system.
Help
Submitted by Frank Lee on Sat, 2010-04-24 04:13.
I have to admit that, as an American, I had a hard time following this article. Part of the problem is that the verb "tabled" has entirely opposite meanings in British and American English. I assume here it has the British meaning (putting a bill on the table) rather than the American meaning (taking it off the table). But beyond that: when the author writes "the monarchy has come to the rescue," is the author expressing his approval, or is the author being ironic?
rescue
Submitted by Paul Belien on Sat, 2010-04-24 08:30.