Debt fears and an international press conference - part two

This may be interesting for the readers of this blog: the full statement of the N-VA, to which we referred in our previous blog.

Statement N-VA – international press conference

 

Tuesday 8 June 2010

 

 

Ladies and gentlemen,

 

Good afternoon. Let me first take a moment to introduce the people sitting next to me: on my right, Geert  Bourgeois, the former chairman and founder of the N-VA party and currently the Flemish Deputy Prime Minister. On my left, Danny Pieters, a professor of Social Security law at the Catholic University of Leuven and Secretary General of the European Institute of Social Security, who is responsible for an important part of our election programme. We have invited you all to this special international press conference in response to the interest the international media has shown in us recently. We hope you will bear with us for the fact that in this exceptionally short election campaign, we do not have time to give separate interviews to each of you. With only 40 days to campaign, we have to focus all of our attention on the priority of campaigning in Flanders. But I understand that – in light of the polls – you are very interested in the N-VA and I am delighted to hear it. That is why I would like to offer you some explanation about who we are, our message for this campaign, and our vision for Flanders, Belgium and Europe. I will start with a brief statement and afterwards, we will be available for about 15 minutes to answer any questions.

 

***

 

Since the beginning of the 20th century, the Belgian unitary state has gradually become replicated. In order to understand this, one thing is key: Belgium is the only federal country in the world without federal democracy. In splitting all of the traditional political parties into separate Flemish and French-speaking parties in the late 1960s, Belgium effectively became the sum of two different democracies. Which, in recent years, have continued to grow apart with ever-increasing speed, in terms of language and culture, but also in socioeconomic and political matters. The result is that it is only getting more and more difficult to continue to pursue a common policy at the Belgian level. After the elections, politicians from these two democracies are thrown together, with completely different programmes, out of which a compromise has to be forged, not only between these two communities but also between 4 or even 6 different political parties. Increasingly, for the Flemish voter, that is leading to a policy that is diametrically opposed to what he has been promised by the Flemish parties. Things cannot continue like this. It has to change.

 

That is why, as the N-VA we are entering this campaign with a call to confederalism. We do not want a revolution. We do not want to declare Flanders independent overnight. But we do believe in a gradual evolution in the direction of Flanders and Europe, whereby a confederal system could act as a gentle intermediate step. Just as outgoing Prime Minister Yves Leterme and European Commissioner Karel De Gucht, who have described Belgium as a “permanent diplomatic conference”, we believe that Belgium will gradually evaporate. Or as a British newspaper wrote some time ago: “If Belgium disappears, will anyone notice?” What is at stake for the N-VA in this campaign is taking this step to confederalism: nothing more and nothing less. Flanders and Wallonia have to acquire maximum autonomy, so that they are able to conduct the policies that are required for their own communities, for their own socioeconomic problems, for the specific characteristics of their labour markets. Only in this way will both constituent entities be confronted with their responsibility to put their financial affairs in order as well. Only in this way can we, in the future, gradually build down our country’s gigantic level of debt and preserve, and preferably reinforce, our model of social welfare. Because there is one striking fact: in this country, we pay the highest taxes in the OECD, but at the same time, we are burdened with a public debt of over 100% of GDP and we take home the lowest benefits and pensions in Western Europe. That is the cost of the inefficiency of the Belgian structures. And this urgently has to change. That is why the N-VA is calling for a confederal system whereby the centre of gravity for policy is shifted to the constituent entities (also referred to as the “Copernican revolution” by Flemish Minister-President Kris Peeters). The two components can subsequently make agreements as to which powers they wish to continue to exercise jointly. For example, the N-VA has no intention of splitting the Belgian Army. That would be stupid. We want to see a European defence force. And the N-VA is also perfectly prepared to stand in solidarity with Wallonia, as long as it is in a transparent, objective and effective manner. In a confederal system, Flanders and Wallonia will also need to establish a socioeconomic convergence treaty with one another. Granting each other greater freedom at the same time as greater responsibility, that is what we’re after. And based on that freedom and responsibility, it will become easier to work together constructively, where possible and desirable. Where that is not possible, each constituent entity will conduct its own policy.

 

The N-VA is also a very pro-European party. We believe in an evolution towards more extensive powers for Flanders on one hand, and for Europe on the other. Like Flanders, Belgium is very small and therefore offers scarcely any economies of scale. That is why the N-VA is resolutely opting for Flanders and Europe as the two most important levels of authority above the local level. Powers whereby the economies of scale are greater than the cost of heterogeneity should be exercised by the EU (such as defence, the currency, for example), whilst for those powers for which the cost of heterogeneity is too great, it would be better if these would be exercised by Flanders, the level that coincides with our democracy. This is, of course, the principle of subsidiarity.

 

***

 

Finally, I would like to add this: I can certainly imagine that in the eyes of outsiders looking at the problems in Belgium, the issue appears to be a problem between two ethnic groups: the Flemish and French-speakers. This is anything but the case. This is not a problem between people. It is a problem of structures and we have nothing whatsoever against “the” Walloons or “the” French-speakers. However, we do have a problem with the Belgian structures. For the simple reason that they are, first of all, not democratic and secondly, not efficient. Because they are not democratic, they lack sufficient legitimacy. And because they are not efficient, they are a threat to our prosperity and our social model. That is our central concern: evolving towards more democratic structures and towards structures that do work and that will ensure that we are able to maintain our prosperity and well-being in the future as well. However, the Belgian structures should have been modified a long time ago, we have lost much valuable time. It is now five minutes past midnight. We urgently need to dare to change things NOW. And that is exactly why voters should vote for the N-VA in massive numbers. Because the N-VA is the only guarantee for this change.

 

We shall see if the voters actually do give us the score on 13 June that is being projected in the polls right now. In any case, we are keeping our feet solidly on the ground. If we are holding this press conference now, it is not because we think that we have already got the deal sewn up, but simply because there has been intense demand from you. Which is something we fully understand and wanted to respond to. And rest assured: if the N-VA does turn out to make a strong showing in next week’s elections, then we will certainly be seeing one another again. But for now, give us one more week in which to campaign full throttle, so that we can convince everyone in Flanders who is considering voting for the N-VA to actually do so. Because it is a matter of vital importance. Thank you.

N-VA president Bart De Wever

Comments

[Reactie van filipo]

The issue of Brussels can perfectly be handled by making it a European District Capital (Enclave européenne), the way Washington D.C. operates in the US, or Bern in Switserland. That would profit to Brussels (less Administration, hence far less costs), it would profit to Belgium (it would bring down expenses), and it would profit to Europe (more efficiency in dealing with Logistic Problems). So, Brussels isn't the "talon d'Achille" at all of confederalism. The true reason why other parties than NVA are fiercely opposed to this solution, is that they would see disappear their traditional source of financial clientelism: the more Flanders pays for Brussels, the more political individuals (19 Mayors for 1 mn. people ! if that doesn't sound medieval, I wonder what does) can assuage themselves and their clientele to the manna of fiscal earnings.

[Reactie van Hubert Caprasse]

He is right to pinpoint the lack of federal democracy. Many people in belgium find the same. This is precisely the main reason why so many belgian people are in favor of a TRUE federal vote. Bart De Wever is against.
The main obstacle to confederalism is Brussel. In that town, both communities are working and living together and together with many foreign people. Brussel is the "talon d'Achille" van confederalism.
Brussel calls for a true federal country.