Federal polls in Belgium

[Winston]

Yes, I heard the formation of a new government was expected to take up to three months. Holy moly. But surely Yves Leterme and his party are by far the most likely to be leading any new coalition.

Are your mandatory voting laws actually being enforced?

[Dry]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
How did the Walloons wind up speaking French? The area was under French jurisdiction only briefly during the reign of Louis XIV and again under the Directory and Napoleon. Otherwise it was part of the HRE and the Duchy of Brabant along with the Netherlands and the Flemish.

It all goes back to the 13th century.
At that time, in all Europe, latin as official language for secular administration is replaced by more vernacular languages. Languages, closer to the peole, or closer to the secular activities.
France chose 'Francien' (old french) as language for all administrative paperwork, Germany chose (old) German, England (old) English...
The most centralized, structured, influencial state in that time is France. Aristocracy in all Europe will soon speak (or at least learn to speak) french.
In that time, Wallonia's wealthiness comes from the river Maas: the 'land' trade route between France and German cities. Providers and customers of walloon merchants both speak french, it is thus naturaly that the trade language of the time becomes french.
Walloon cities thus chose French as the most natural option. The same way a small country today, without true structured, written language, would chose english as official, administrative language.

So, as a matter of speaking, french was chosen, because it was the language of our main customer.

[Colonâ„¢]

Originally posted by Winston
Yes, I heard the formation of a new government was expected to take up to three months. Holy moly. But surely Yves Leterme and his party are by far the most likely to be leading any new coalition.

His cartel is the biggest single faction in the parliament. The liberal family (across the language border) however currently has many seats as the christian-democrat family (both have 40 seats). And while the Flemish christian democrats (in alliance with a Flemish nationalist party) strongly advocate state reforms, the Walloon christian democrats strongly oppose such reforms. The two liberal parties get along far better, since the Walloon liberals don't categorically reject reforms and the Flemish don't make reforms a condition sine qua non.

[Colonâ„¢]

Positive is that the far-right lost 2% in Antwerp.

[Colonâ„¢]

Something else to consider is that Flemish christian democrat party may seek to booth their cartel-partner (being a moderate Flemish-nationalist party) in order to ease gov't formation, although this is unlikely.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Dry


It all goes back to the 13th century.
At that time, in all Europe, latin as official language for secular administration is replaced by more vernacular languages. Languages, closer to the peole, or closer to the secular activities.
France chose 'Francien' (old french) as language for all administrative paperwork, Germany chose (old) German, England (old) English...
The most centralized, structured, influencial state in that time is France. Aristocracy in all Europe will soon speak (or at least learn to speak) french.
In that time, Wallonia's wealthiness comes from the river Maas: the 'land' trade route between France and German cities. Providers and customers of walloon merchants both speak french, it is thus naturaly that the trade language of the time becomes french.
Walloon cities thus chose French as the most natural option. The same way a small country today, without true structured, written language, would chose english as official, administrative language.

So, as a matter of speaking, french was chosen, because it was the language of our main customer.

I suppose that's plausible. Another possibility is that they're the descendants of Romanized Gauls, who spoke Latin, while the Flemish may be the descendants of Germans.
How close to French is the Walloon language? Would the average Walloon have no trouble communicating with a Frenchman without any prior exposure to French or are the two languages distinct but closely related like Spanish and Portugese or like German and Dutch?

[Winston]

Sounds like a horrendously complicated federal system, even with just the 2 (3) state entities. I'm with the ones who favour reform of some kind to this.

Is the mandatory vote thing a popular measure, and is it enforced always? It sounds like something the French-speakers got shoed in.

[alva]

Originally posted by Colonâ„¢
Something else to consider is that Flemish christian democrat party may seek to booth their cartel-partner (being a moderate Flemish-nationalist party) in order to ease gov't formation, although this is unlikely.

That would be political suicide for the next election IMO though, which is next year already.

[Colonâ„¢]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove


I suppose that's plausible. Another possibility is that they're the descendants of Romanized Gauls, who spoke Latin, while the Flemish may be the descendants of Germans.
How close to French is the Walloon language? Would the average Walloon have no trouble communicating with a Frenchman without any prior exposure to French or are the two languages distinct but closely related like Spanish and Portugese or like German and Dutch?

Again, don't use modern definitions interchangeably with historical definitions. Germanic tribes are not the same as Germans and historical Flanders is not modern-day Flanders. Modern-day Flanders is essentially a spin-off from Belgium. What combines the constituent parts (mainly chunks of historical Flanders, historical Brabant and historical Liege) is their status as the Dutch-speaking portion of Belgium. Old French dialects were not exclusive to the area that now composes Wallonia, and vice versa.

[Colonâ„¢]

Originally posted by alva


That would be political suicide for the next election IMO though, which is next year already.

I know, which is why it's unlikely. I'm sure more than one christian democrat was uncomfortable with the flag-waving at the celebrations though.

[alva]

Originally posted by Winston
Sounds like a horrendously complicated federal system, even with just the 2 (3) state entities. I'm with the ones who favour reform of some kind to this.

Dude, you have no idea of the complexity of this small nation. Thre's a reason why other multi-lingual nations visit us to see how we manage it all and that we are good compromisers.
Oh, and there's even a German state as well.

Is the mandatory vote thing a popular measure, and is it enforced always? It sounds like something the French-speakers got shoed in.

Not an issue, the liberals have tried to change it but have never found enough support for it. There's usually one or other party in favour of dropping it but that's more of opportunistic next-election reasons than anything else.
The only time there was almost enough support for it, was to stop the far right (protest) voters.
Personally, while being against it on principle, I'm for it for pragmatic reasons.

No idea, how heavily it is enforced. AFAIK every time a couple of folks will get a fine but I don't thhink the numbers are very high. Actually, you can get away with it when it comes to the European election as they don't really won't to take the debate to a European level.

[alva]

Originally posted by Colonâ„¢


I know, which is why it's unlikely. I'm sure more than one christian democrat was uncomfortable with the flag-waving at the celebrations though.

Yeah, the moment I saw that, I was thinking that's either a very bad mistake by the CD&V or cleverly set up - though perhaps risky -by the NVA.

[Colonâ„¢]

Originally posted by Winston
Sounds like a horrendously complicated federal system, even with just the 2 (3) state entities. I'm with the ones who favour reform of some kind to this.

Is the mandatory vote thing a popular measure, and is it enforced always? It sounds like something the French-speakers got shoed in.

There's nothing complicated in principle. To form a federal government you need a majority vote in parliament, simple as that. There's however a number of unwritten rules, such as the requirement to have a majority in both sides of the country (a a majority of Dutch-speaking MP's as well as French-speaking MP's) and the requirement to have a symmetrical gov't (if the Walloon socialist party is in, so will be the Flemish socialist party etc). It's entirely possible some of these unwritten rules will be pushed to the wayside though.

The demands of the cartel of Flemish christian democrats and Flemish nationalists aren't aimed at the simplication of the federal structures.

[Colonâ„¢]

Originally posted by alva


Yeah, the moment I saw that, I was thinking that's either a very bad mistake by the CD&V or cleverly set up - though perhaps risky -by the NVA.

Have you watched TV1's election program? De Wever was talking about reconciliation with Dedecker, even if he supposedly meant to be on personal level. He must be wondering if he shouldn't have stuck to Dedecker.

[The Vagabond]

So there are separate parties for both Flanders and Wallonie. But what about Brussels? What parties is it supposed to vote for?