However, it remained a presentation of the report. Because the Brussels majority did not want to have a substantive and political debate because it is too delicate and we are too close to the elections. “As I predicted, parliament has only been able to take note of the entire process. In no way was parliament involved in the process of the Future of Brussels,” Vanden Borre explains.
‘Divided opinions’
Because many questions can be asked about the content. The initial intention was that the recurring questions about the organization of the municipalities, OCMWs, police zones and the Region would be discussed without any taboo. But in the report we note that topics such as a merger of municipalities or mergers of police zones were not explored further, neither in the further analysis nor in the recommendations of the experts, because these topics ‘gave rise to divided opinions within the population’. “That is a strange reasoning: when has a subject not led to divided opinions,” Vanden Borre wonders.
Election manifesto
It is notable that the expansion of Brussels and the reorganization of community powers were extensively discussed in the report, despite the fact that these topics did not fall within the scope of the research. “It is rather an election manifesto from Défi, the former FDF,” Vanden Borre notes.
None the wiser
“The mismanagement, which seems to be the norm in Brussels, therefore continues. The driving forces behind this project – Ecolo/Groen and one.brussels-Vooruit – have been at a loss when it comes to institutional reforms. Not a bit has changed during this entire reign. They have been sidelined for an entire legislature and have never knocked on the table. They will probably soon go to the voters with exactly the same promises. Brussels residents deserve better. The institutional disorder continues and it is only the parties that have been in power here for decades that benefit from this,” concludes Mathias Vanden Borre.
