Brussels           One of the tricky things for an outsider to understand in Belgium is who is in charge?  In organizing, it’s important to know who the target might be on actions and campaigns.  Where does authority lie?  Where does the buck stop?  As organizers discussed what it would take to change the way landlord and tenant relationships were arbitrated on issues like rent, we often found ourselves tripping over the basic civic structure.  If the rental program was only under the city of Brussels, could the city council amend the program, if there was such a thing?  We were often then confounded when the answer came back that it might be the regional government?  How was that different from the national government?  What was going on?

We weren’t starting from scratch.  We knew there had been long periods where the various parties, left, right, and middle were unable to form a government.  The news would cover that problem from time to time.  Regional government was another matter.

Trying to get a handle on this phenomenon meant a bit of talk and a lot more research.  Belgium has almost three distinct regions based on language and history.  As one source summarized,

The Constitution begins by summing up the constituent parts: “Belgium is a federal State composed of Communities and Regions. Belgium comprises three Communities: the Flemish Community, the French Community and the German-speaking Community. Belgium comprises three Regions: the Flemish Region, the Walloon Region and the Brussels Region.”

ACORN’s affiliate is in Brussels and we are working with other emerging organizations in communities and towns in Wallonia, where French dominates.  We know where we are, even if we don’t know where to go.

Federal governments, like that in the United States, are not unknown to us.  What seems so different in Belgium is that the regions are both disconnected, seemingly without a lot of understanding from one to another, but also that the national government doesn’t seem to preempt the regions, as it would in the states.  This seems to have evolved by design, and we are not alone in scratching our heads about how to navigate all of this, since it also seems an issue for the European Union.

The regional governments have important competencies and large budgets. The federal level has been reduced over the course of six constitutional reforms. This is even recognized by the EU. Regional ministers represent Belgium in meetings of different configurations of the Council of the EU. Although the EU only recognizes countries as member states, the Belgian regions and communities can also sit at the table.

I can remember reading the arguments in the US that came out of places like Minnesota that argued vociferously for the merits of regional government.  The concept wasn’t wrong on its face.  It was based on interlocking interests and the need to coordinate on policies around the economy, transportation, and other services that might be more effectively handled on a regional level, rather than by city, town, or county.  Belgium was a different animal though, and might dissuade anyone from thinking regions were the way to go.

All of which makes figuring out who is on first, and what is on second, as the old joke goes, a puzzle that we will have to solve.  Our colleagues were not encouraging.  They sluffed off our confusion by arguing the divisions among the various political parties and the emerging strength of the far-right party, meant that thinking we could win anything at almost any governmental level was virtually impossible.

What have we gotten ourselves into in Belgium?