| Start | Contact | Zoeken | Kalender | Webwinkel | Lid worden |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 The Vlaams Belang in your language
Press conference Vlaams Belang on the Belgian institutional crisis: now is the time for Flemish independence
31.08.2007 12.00u - Flemish parliament – 31/08/2007 Eighty days after the june federal elections, Belgium is facing a profound constitutional crisis. Negotiations between Flemings and Walloons are in a complete stalemate and the political elites have not been able to form a new national government. The international community should be aware of the fact that it's only a question of time before the dissolution of the Belgian state. Introduction: the Vlaams Belang The Vlaams Belang is the party-political representative of the Flemish movement that has opposed the artificial state that is Belgium since the early 20th century. Our choice is for an independent Flemish state, with Brussels as its capital. An independent Flanders will be a member state of the European Union and should develop a close cooperation with the Netherlands. The Vlaams Belang invokes the right of all peoples to govern themselves, a right firmly established and recognized in international conventions (e.g. the charter of the UN). At the regional elections of 2004, the Vlaams Belang obtained 24,2% of Flemish votes. In numerous towns and cities, our score at the municipal elections of 2006 often exceeded 30%. Since the founding of the party, 30 years ago, the Vlaams Belang has resolutely advocated Flemish independence. While this political platform was then considered extravagant by many, in particular the other political parties, today about 60% of Flemings consider autonomy as a valid alternative to Belgium unity. Why independence? There have always been considerable differences in culture, politics and economic reality between the 6.000.000 dutchspeaking Flemings and the 4.000.000 frenchspeaking Walloons. Two regions with a diffent culture and history were artificially combined in 1830 to serve as a buffer between France and England. The Flemings are not just the demographic majority of Belgium. Flanders is also the economic heart of Belgium. Foreign exports, for example, originate for 85% from Flanders. The unemployement level in Flanders is between 6 and 8%. In Wallonia it is between 16 and 18%. 25% of the Flemings are in governmental employement (the European average), while in Wallonia this is a staggering 40%. The yearly financial transfers from Flanders to Wallonia are estimated at 12.000.000.000 euro. These transfers, proportionally more than the tranfers from the former GDR to the former DDR, cannot be considered as a from of interregional "solidarity" in a federal state. In federal states, forms of organised interregional solidarity are no exception. But they are always limited. The transfers of wealth in Germany are transparent, objective, democratically supported and the result of free negotiations between the different regional states. This is in no way the case in Belgium. These huge financial transfers, combined with a political refusal of Wallonia to make the necessary reforms, are a permanent obstacle to good government. Belgian governmental policy is consistently paralysed by fundamental differences of opinion between Flemish and frenchspeaking politicians, who disagree on about everything, be it crimefighting, the judiciary, economic policy, immigration, asylum or foreign policy. For the Vlaams Belang, Flemish independence is matter of necessity. It is the only possibility for Flanders and Wallonia to prepare for the political end economical challenges of the future. The current political crisis In the campaign for the federal elections of june this year, some Flemish parties went to the voters with a clear platform of institutional reform. These parties, with a pronounced "Flemish profile", made strong gains in these elections, amongst them the kartel led by Yves Leterme. Clearly, the Flemings had voted for greater autonomy. On the other side of the linguistic divide, the frenchspeaking parties had promised their voters the opposite: reinforcement of the federal state and less autonomy for the regions. These opposing viewpoints of Walloon and Flemish parties, whose allegiance is only to the voters in their own part of the country, are now preventing the formation of a Belgian government. Flemish resolutions About all Flemish parties base the institutional part of their electoral platform on "the five resolutions of the Flemish parliament". Between 1995 and 1999, a special committee of the Flemish parliament studied further institutional reforms. Its activities resulted in 5 resolutions, all of which were adopted in the Flemish parliament. The resolutions call for financial and fiscal autonomy of the regions, regional division of the national railtransport company, complete transfer of direct taxation to the regions, regionalistion of the department of health care and the possibility for regional corporate tax cuts. These resolutions have also been incorporated into the statement of governmental policy of the Flemish Government and are therefore binding for the parties in the Flemish government: the CD&V-NVA kartel of Mr Yves Leterme, the SP.A and the VLD. Bold words were spoken during the campaign and shortly after the elections. "We will not join a government without major institutional reform", CD&V-NVA said. What the absolute minimum should be, was never explained, however. Flemish moderation With his 800.000 personal votes, christian-democrat Yves Leterme is earmarked as the future prime minister of Belgium. Earlier in his career, Leterme had motivated his personal transfer from the federal to the regional level of politics as a wish "to better serve Flanders". The Leterme who attempted to form a government recently, however, exhibited less courage and boldness than the Leterme who had won the elections and obtained 800.000 personal votes. Confronted with the timid demands of Flemish negotiators, the frenchspeaking politicians, after a while, felt strong enough to take an offensive posture: they formulated a series of unacceptable demands, e.g. concerning the position of the Flemings in Brussels and its surrounding municipalities. At the same time, they publicly exaggerated the proposals of the Flemish negotiators as being tantamount to the dissolution of the Belgian state. Closer study of the Flemish demands, however, soon reveals that this is far from being the case: the proposed reforms hardly touch the core of the Belgian problem. Even negotiators with a stronger Flemish profile, like Bart De Wever, had to admit to their voters that the Flemish demands were very minimal. The outrageous financial tranfers from Flanders to Wallonia e.g. were not even touched upon. Stalemate The conclusion that the negotiations for the formation of a new Belgian government are in a complete deadlock is unescapable. Flemish aspirations for greater autonomy are met with a firm and determined "non" by the frenchspeaking parties. The only way to avoid a constitutional crisis seems to be for Flemish negotiators to lower the already timid and minimal demands for reform of the federal state. The King can consult as many retired and ageing Belgian politicians as he wants: he can no longer obscure the fact that his kingdom has already fallen apart. The breakdown of Belgian federalism It is no longer possible to form a government that reflects the political aspirations of both parts of the country. Public opinion seems te be very aware of this fact. When Flanders e.g. is not even allowed to finance (with its own funds!) the necessary public works for a railroad to the port of Antwerp, even the most moderate Flemish citizen is alarmed. The current crisis clearly shows - if proof was needed - that the Belgian federal model is no longer functioning. Of course, there are successful federal states. For a federal state to work, two conditions have to be met however: - the federal state has to be the result of the will and the wish of independent entities to cooperate on essential matters - there must be more than two entities in the federation The US, Switzerland and Germany are examples of successful federalism, because these two conditions are met. The Belgian federation was bound to fail because it was never the result of the will of independent entities to cooperate, rather on the contrary. The frenchspeakers initially agreed on the idea of a federal state based on socio-economic principle and always superceeded by a strong Belgian level of government and finance (money to be provided by Flanders, of course). Flanders, on the other hand, wanted a federalism based on the cultural differences between both parts of the countries. For the foreign observer, it may seem odd that it was the majority ethnic group that was calling for greater autonomy. Indeed, federalism meant giving up the power of numbers for Flanders. As such, the frenchspeakers knew what they were doing when agreeing to the principle of federalism. The ensuing institutional reforms have always followed the same pattern: the regions of Flanders and Wallonia got more power and in exchange Flanders paid more for Brussels and Wallonia. In other words, institutional reforms were bought in hard cash. Another trademark was always the institution of further institutional protection for the frenchspeaking minority. The Belgian government has to number as many frenchspeakers as Flemings. For each further devolution of power, a two thirds parliamentary majority is required. And there is also the so-called "alarm bel procedure" which gives the frenchspeaking politicians the right to block any law that has been voted with a normal majority (effectively negating the power of numbers of Flemish respresentatives). And lastly, institutional reform and devolution have never touched on any sensitive issue, like the financial transfers. It is the fear of losing this privileged position that is now inspiring Walloon politicians to a determined "non". Watershed It is our opinion that Flanders has to change tactics. Flemish politicians have to abandon the Belgian frame of mind, if they do not want to endanger the prosperity and well-being of the Flemish people. Even the gentelest man or woman will end a hopeless marriage. The Czech-Slovak scenario is looming. After the 1992 elections, Czech and Slovak negotiators soon discovered that their differences in opinion were too great to bridge. They concluded that a divorce was not only inevitable but even necessary. The result was a peaceful separation. Never has a time been so auspicious to declare Flemish independence, as the only way out of the crisis. Flemish independence: a legitimate and democratic demand It is sometimes suggested that Flemish independence would lead to chaos , violence or even the conditions that prevailed in the Balkans in the nineties. Nothing could be further from the truth. The independent Flanders we aspire to, is also a democratic Flanders. We explicitly envisage a "Czech-Slovak" scenario. This independent Flanders would, in our view, be a member state of the EU and would also take up all other international obligations of the former Belgian state. On februari 14th, we introduced, by way of resolution in the Flemish parliament, a blueprint for a constitution for an independent Flanders. This model constitution included all fundamental rights - as guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights. Plan of action of the Vlaams Belang: 1. Mobilisation of the public opinion: during the last months the Vlaams Belang mounted a campaign under the banner of "Volk, word staat" (literally: "People, become a state"). With the current Belgian crisis; we will step up this campaign. 2. Declare Flemish independence. The Flemish parliament is the only legitimate parliament of Flanders and should therefore not be limited to its current legislative competencies. Next week, the Vlaams Belang will ask the Flemish parliament to declare the autonomy of Flanders. 3. Referendum. After the declaration of principle by the Flemish parliament, the Flemish people will decide, by referendum, on the question of final independence. A clear choice for independence would give enough legitimacy to ignore the Belgian constitution. Filip Dewinter President political Group Flemish parliament Joris Van Hauthem President political Group Senate Marie-Rose Morel Vice president political Group Flemish parliament |
| Actualiteit :: Persberichten :: Dossiers :: Programma :: Gezond verstand :: Contact :: Kalender :: Andere sites | ||
|
