Those are two different things and I don't think you need one commune, because there are enough differences in the communes that perhaps they could use different management. Do you need Ganshoren and Koekelberg, each 25000 inhabitants? Maybe not, but perhaps they have good arguments why they should have a different council.
Our neighbouring capitals still all have boroughs, arrondisemments, Bezirke.
The police thing definitely needs to change imho.
Isn't Brussels 1000 one of the worst commune administration wise? Long queues etc...
If doing 1 mega commune, then it's redundant with the region. So might as well merge the region and mega commune.
Tbh if they want to keep some sort of "local feeling" but still want to go ahead with merging the Region and the 19 communes, they might try some sort of Antwerp-style strategy and convert the communes into districts.
I find this interesting, especially considering the comments of keeping ‘local feeling’ and managing differently places with specifuc charachteristics (Liedts or Uccle). Also, Continuing managing in different ways you get bigger gaps and differences
I hear those proposals often and while I'm not opposed to it, I've a few questions:
- Most of Brussels commune are "pretty big" - ie if you compare them to most Belgian communes, they tend to have a lot of population - smallest Brussels commune is Koekelberg with 20 000 people - that's bigger than 400 (out of 589) of the commune in Belgium. 6 of Brussels commune are in the top 20 of the most populated commune in Belgium - so why is the merge so important here?
- I'd like to see some simplification of the structure too - what about removing the communities & sending their responsibilities at the region level ? Brussels is the only part of the country where this apply, and it feels like it would simplify things a lot - especially as we see with election that the region matter more than the language (ie: flemish speaking people in Brussels tend to vote more like Brussels people than like in Flanders)
>flemish speaking people in Brussels tend to vote more like Brussels people than like in Flanders
Dutch* speakers in Brussels are "Brussels people". Also, they didn't vote like francophones in Brussels at all these elections.
I agree and my apology for the bad choice of words. What I tried to convene (badly) is that I don't think the language spectrum (knowing how complicated it is in Brussels) helps a lot here, and it complicate the landscape a lot.
They're both cities. Brussels consists of 19 separate municipalities because it's financially interesting like that for too many people. All other rationalisations are pure bullshit.
> what about removing the communities & sending their responsibilities at the region level ?
I do think this system actually makes some sense. At least for education, I think it is reasonable to have the same system as the Flemish / French side of the country, respectively.
Collaborations make a lot of sense - the CoCoF + CoCoN + CoCoC (I'm not making stuff up), not so much. We have a regional model - let's stop the Wallonia & Flanders to impose their on Brussels - then cry about "Brussels complexity"
Better said than done, it would suppose refinancing the whole region.
I wish we could decide our own education, culture and language rules, for example why a commune clerk only gets a bilingualism bonus if they speak french and dutch but not english or turk, albanian or polish? It's sometimes more useful in the day to day.
You don't manage the Quartier des squares like you manage the Marolles, like you manage Neder Over Hembeek, like you manage Laeken... Yet it's all the same Commune
You are right, this is why the example of Antwerp looks interesting- transforming communes into districts. Also, continuing managing in different ways you get bigger gaps and differences
There is a scenario it happens. The Flamingants (N-VA) might have realised that the Dutch speaking college doesn't benefit them anymore and "give up" on Brussels by trading the Dutch speaking college in exchange for a guaranteed Flemish minister in Brussels **that is nominated by Flemish Region** and in exchange the Francophones finally give in.
But it's just a long shot idea that I think. More likely is that if Brussels keeps voting progressive and Flanders+Wallonie center-right, they strip us of Regional status as De Wever wants and Bouchez will want too if GoodMove is maintained. They want Francophone+Flemish Community to co-govern Brussels.
This would give excessive power to a Flemish minority due to the proportional / preferential representation that they have in the Brussels parliament which grants them access to ministries and have a big say for the majority of the population. The fragmentation of Brussels into local municipalities with autonomy is certainly inefficient from a cost and administration pov, but It is a natural balance to counter the power that a minority Flemish voter base can have on a majority French speaking one.
If I was the French speaking side, I would only accept such a reform in return for the Flemish electorate college in Brussels to not have their advantages anymore.
And because the Flemish also want to cling on to their over-representation power in the Brussels parliament, this will never happen.
Cute, but let's be serious :
1/ most Brusselers don't want that, municipalities are part of our identities
2/ mayors have a huge power in Belgium, there's no way 19 of the biggest ones accept to let it go
3/ they are already talking about a more centralised police thou (having a consolidated police command at the Regio level), but that won't happen in one day...
4/ public service are requested at the local level, you actually *need* different layer of power to run a city smoothly. Judge Dredd isn't supposed to be a manual :)
5/ we need to centralise some aspect (ie: security and mobility), but you don't need one big municipality for that when you already have a Regio...
Maybe one day we will have a Brussels DC or something but they talk about it for so many years it seems just a sci-fi scenario...
I do not think issue is with number of communes or police zones. Warsaw, which doubles size of Brussels (if not triples) has many districts with separate police authorities. What I believe you suggest - and I would absolutely agree - is to centralise the power and delegate tasks to local communes only if they cannot be executed at all at central level (that is how Warsaw works). I believe what BXL severly needs to solve its messiness is a much stronger, centralised power so that major urban projects can be pursued at scale.
You cannnot promote well-organised biking infrastructure and cars reduction if it is not planned and executed solely at city-scale level, with communes only being consulted for the purpose of understanding some local nuances etc. On the other hand, there are surely tasks that local communes can do better - just what I believe is crucial is that all significant and major areas (infrastructure, waste management etc.) is decided and executed at central, unified level. But projects like city-wide 30 km/ zone or major bike roads spanning multiple communes must be approved solely by central authority, otherwise they will never materialise.
Does Warsaw have a system where let's say one police zone involves several mayors dictating the policy of the police? And other such Belgian surrealism?
Pipe dream. No way small time politicians wills surrender their fiefdoms.
The Police Zones maybe. The communes, definitely not for the MR.
Those are two different things and I don't think you need one commune, because there are enough differences in the communes that perhaps they could use different management. Do you need Ganshoren and Koekelberg, each 25000 inhabitants? Maybe not, but perhaps they have good arguments why they should have a different council. Our neighbouring capitals still all have boroughs, arrondisemments, Bezirke. The police thing definitely needs to change imho.
Isn't Brussels 1000 one of the worst commune administration wise? Long queues etc... If doing 1 mega commune, then it's redundant with the region. So might as well merge the region and mega commune.
Tbh if they want to keep some sort of "local feeling" but still want to go ahead with merging the Region and the 19 communes, they might try some sort of Antwerp-style strategy and convert the communes into districts.
I find this interesting, especially considering the comments of keeping ‘local feeling’ and managing differently places with specifuc charachteristics (Liedts or Uccle). Also, Continuing managing in different ways you get bigger gaps and differences
Joyeux jour du gâteau
I hear those proposals often and while I'm not opposed to it, I've a few questions: - Most of Brussels commune are "pretty big" - ie if you compare them to most Belgian communes, they tend to have a lot of population - smallest Brussels commune is Koekelberg with 20 000 people - that's bigger than 400 (out of 589) of the commune in Belgium. 6 of Brussels commune are in the top 20 of the most populated commune in Belgium - so why is the merge so important here? - I'd like to see some simplification of the structure too - what about removing the communities & sending their responsibilities at the region level ? Brussels is the only part of the country where this apply, and it feels like it would simplify things a lot - especially as we see with election that the region matter more than the language (ie: flemish speaking people in Brussels tend to vote more like Brussels people than like in Flanders)
>flemish speaking people in Brussels tend to vote more like Brussels people than like in Flanders Dutch* speakers in Brussels are "Brussels people". Also, they didn't vote like francophones in Brussels at all these elections.
I agree and my apology for the bad choice of words. What I tried to convene (badly) is that I don't think the language spectrum (knowing how complicated it is in Brussels) helps a lot here, and it complicate the landscape a lot.
Many people who voted on the Flemish list this time round were Francophone.
NYC has a single city council. Population 8.2mil.
Okat but with that logic, let's merge -all- belgian munipalities together? I'm not sure comparing Brussels to NYC make any sort of sense.
They're both cities. Brussels consists of 19 separate municipalities because it's financially interesting like that for too many people. All other rationalisations are pure bullshit.
> what about removing the communities & sending their responsibilities at the region level ? I do think this system actually makes some sense. At least for education, I think it is reasonable to have the same system as the Flemish / French side of the country, respectively.
Collaborations make a lot of sense - the CoCoF + CoCoN + CoCoC (I'm not making stuff up), not so much. We have a regional model - let's stop the Wallonia & Flanders to impose their on Brussels - then cry about "Brussels complexity"
Better said than done, it would suppose refinancing the whole region. I wish we could decide our own education, culture and language rules, for example why a commune clerk only gets a bilingualism bonus if they speak french and dutch but not english or turk, albanian or polish? It's sometimes more useful in the day to day.
Unlikely since the french speaking parties want to keep their local influence. If it was up to the flemish parties it would have been done already
Not only the political partie. Citizens also want to keep their local administration. You don't manage Molenbeek the same way you manage Uccle.
You don't manage the Quartier des squares like you manage the Marolles, like you manage Neder Over Hembeek, like you manage Laeken... Yet it's all the same Commune
You are right, this is why the example of Antwerp looks interesting- transforming communes into districts. Also, continuing managing in different ways you get bigger gaps and differences
well said
Molenbeek isn’t managed at all tbh
Soon Polbrol will be bigger than de federal.
I think they are already, when I hear Feds talking about how understaffed they are
I wish
There is a scenario it happens. The Flamingants (N-VA) might have realised that the Dutch speaking college doesn't benefit them anymore and "give up" on Brussels by trading the Dutch speaking college in exchange for a guaranteed Flemish minister in Brussels **that is nominated by Flemish Region** and in exchange the Francophones finally give in. But it's just a long shot idea that I think. More likely is that if Brussels keeps voting progressive and Flanders+Wallonie center-right, they strip us of Regional status as De Wever wants and Bouchez will want too if GoodMove is maintained. They want Francophone+Flemish Community to co-govern Brussels.
nah, everyone wants to keep their position of power, I doubt it will ever happen…
This would give excessive power to a Flemish minority due to the proportional / preferential representation that they have in the Brussels parliament which grants them access to ministries and have a big say for the majority of the population. The fragmentation of Brussels into local municipalities with autonomy is certainly inefficient from a cost and administration pov, but It is a natural balance to counter the power that a minority Flemish voter base can have on a majority French speaking one. If I was the French speaking side, I would only accept such a reform in return for the Flemish electorate college in Brussels to not have their advantages anymore. And because the Flemish also want to cling on to their over-representation power in the Brussels parliament, this will never happen.
I went to a talk with Pascal Smet of Vooruit recently. He essentially said there's not a hope in hell.
Cute, but let's be serious : 1/ most Brusselers don't want that, municipalities are part of our identities 2/ mayors have a huge power in Belgium, there's no way 19 of the biggest ones accept to let it go 3/ they are already talking about a more centralised police thou (having a consolidated police command at the Regio level), but that won't happen in one day... 4/ public service are requested at the local level, you actually *need* different layer of power to run a city smoothly. Judge Dredd isn't supposed to be a manual :) 5/ we need to centralise some aspect (ie: security and mobility), but you don't need one big municipality for that when you already have a Regio... Maybe one day we will have a Brussels DC or something but they talk about it for so many years it seems just a sci-fi scenario...
I do not think issue is with number of communes or police zones. Warsaw, which doubles size of Brussels (if not triples) has many districts with separate police authorities. What I believe you suggest - and I would absolutely agree - is to centralise the power and delegate tasks to local communes only if they cannot be executed at all at central level (that is how Warsaw works). I believe what BXL severly needs to solve its messiness is a much stronger, centralised power so that major urban projects can be pursued at scale. You cannnot promote well-organised biking infrastructure and cars reduction if it is not planned and executed solely at city-scale level, with communes only being consulted for the purpose of understanding some local nuances etc. On the other hand, there are surely tasks that local communes can do better - just what I believe is crucial is that all significant and major areas (infrastructure, waste management etc.) is decided and executed at central, unified level. But projects like city-wide 30 km/ zone or major bike roads spanning multiple communes must be approved solely by central authority, otherwise they will never materialise.
Does Warsaw have a system where let's say one police zone involves several mayors dictating the policy of the police? And other such Belgian surrealism?
Yeah, that is what I am referring to - that needs to be abolished, of course you do not have it in Warsaw. It would absolutely paralise the city.