Local power in a complex city

From public spaces and cleanliness to housing and security, communal elections play a critical role in shaping the future of this city.

Local power in a complex city

Belgians head to the polls on October 13 for the second time in four months, this time for local elections. The stakes are high, not just for the Brussels region’s 19 communes or even the 581 communes across the country but also for Belgium’s ongoing political drama.

While national and regional elections often dominate headlines, it is the local level of governance where Brussels residents feel the most direct impact on their lives. From public spaces and cleanliness to housing and security, communal elections play a critical role in shaping the future of this city.

This year’s communal elections follow the June 2024 federal and regional elections, which produced surprising results, including the rise of a right-wing liberal majority in Wallonia and a conservative Flemish nationalist-led majority in Flanders. In Brussels, the right-wing liberal Mouvement Réformateur (MR) surged while the Francophone green party Ecolo slumped. And in the Brussels Flemish parliament, their Flemish greens, Groen, came out on top, while the socialist Vooruit and centrist liberal Open VLD both lost seats.

There has been little progress since June the formation of Brussels’ regional government, likely this is due, at least in part, to politicians awaiting key signals from voters about local dynamics. In a political environment this complex and a city as fragmented as Brussels - both in governance and demographics - the communal elections will be a battleground with unique stakes.

Potted political history

To understand the significance of these elections, we need to take a step back and look at how the Brussels political system evolved. When Belgium declared independence in 1830, Brussels was far smaller and less influential than it is today.

Historically, the City of Brussels was simply defined, as the area within the second walls of Brussels - nowadays traced by Brussels' inner ring road or the ‘Small Ring’. Rapid industrial growth in the 19th century expanded the city, leading to increased cooperation between Brussels and its neighbouring communes. The collaboration became formalised in 1874 with the creation of the Conference of Mayors under Jules Anspach, marking the first steps towards joint urban planning. This Conference of Mayors still exists today.

Brussels as we know it today, however, did not fully emerge until much later. The Brussels-Capital Region, with its own parliament and government, was only established in 1989 – more than a century after Belgium’s independence.

Voters head to the polls in October, just four months after the federal and regional elections

Even so, power remains decentralised in the 19 communes, with each of them wielding considerable autonomy, especially in matters like public space, safety and local services. This fragmented governance means that Brussels is a city where local issues dominate political conversations, even as it plays host to regional, federal and international institutions.

Region vs communes

The October 2024 communal elections will put the spotlight on the balance of power between the regional and communal governments.

The Brussels Regional Parliament usually manages planning and policy approaches to all-city issues, like mobility, housing and economic development. Meanwhile, the communes have broad and often overlapping power, with authority over the practical implementation of these policies, as well as local matters such as street cleanliness, public safety and the development of public spaces.

Waste collection varies across communes

However, if, how and when that power is exercised is at the discretion of the mayor (or ‘’bourgmestre’) and their council. This can lead to tension and even conflict between the region and the communes.

One recent example of the ongoing tension between the regional and communal levels is the controversy surrounding Good Move, the regional government’s ambitious mobility plan aimed at reducing car traffic, improving air quality and increasing pedestrian zones.

Launched in 2020, Good Move has transformed several busy streets across Brussels into pedestrian-friendly zones, particularly in the central City of Brussels commune. While Good Move enjoyed cross-party support, the rollout faced lively and sometimes even violent opposition. A potent cocktail of a zealous, organised opposition mixed with concerns from residents and local businesses emerged, ultimately testing the resolve of local councils.

While Good Move is a regional project, the implementation largely fell to the communes, which are responsible for managing public spaces within their borders. This has led to conflicts between local mayors and the regional government, particularly in communes like Anderlecht and Schaerbeek, where officials have pushed back on measures that they said were imposed without sufficient consultation. Meanwhile other communes, like Saint-Gilles and Ixelles, would come back with diluted versions of the plan.

When such disputes flare up, the Conference of Mayors comes into play. This closed-door, informal body comprises all Brussels Region’s mayors and convenes every two weeks. It has no real legal basis yet has a crucial role in coordinating the communes' stance on regional issues. This could include any number of issues, from Good Move to the installation of chargers for electric cars, to standards on quality of housing stock. It is a powerful body, giving the communes power to push back on the region, force compromises or secure additional funding.

However, critics have long complained about the lack of transparency in the Conference of Mayors. While it could be seen as a counterbalance to regional overreach and an important tool to guarantee implementation best matches the local context, these closed-door meetings make it harder for citizens to understand how and why decisions are made.

What June means for October

The June 2024 federal and regional elections produced results that have already shaped the political discourse leading up to the communal elections.

The big winner in Brussels was the MR, which emerged as the largest party in the regional elections with 26% of the vote. After 20 years in opposition, this puts the regional party leader, David Leisterh, in the position of ‘formateur’, with the responsibility of forming a government.

It involves hacking out compromises with potential partners such as the centrist-conservative party Les Engagés and the centre-left Parti Socialiste (PS). Meanwhile, on the Dutch-speaking side, the formateur is Elke van den Brandt, the current Regional Minister for Mobility and the champion of the Good Move plan.

Both face considerable challenges in building their coalition. MR must negotiate with parties like Les Engagés and the PS, whose policies they had opposed for years. Meanwhile, Groen seeks to build a coalition from a collection of four parties, when they only have three ministerial posts to distribute.

However, the upcoming communal elections are delaying the regional government. In a fragmented political landscape, the outcome of the communal elections may give the negotiators more insight into future governance dynamics and the preferences of the electorate as they finalise their positions. For MR, the October elections could help them consolidate their gains, especially in affluent communes like Woluwe-Saint-Pierre and Uccle, where local governance remains a battleground for liberal policies focused on business development and public services.

Meanwhile, the Ecolo endured devastating regional elections, losing more than half its seats. Insiders have reflected that a combination of factors may have contributed to their difficulties, from strategic errors in the campaign to frustration with lack of delivery on policy promises. Ecolo’s share of the vote dropped to just 10%, and they fell from 15 seats in 2019 to just seven in the 89-seat Brussels parliament.

However, green parties often fare better in local elections, where environmental policies like public space renewal and mobility projects resonate more with voters. Ecolo will be hoping to protect local projects like mobility reform from being destroyed by MR who ran on a platform against them.

Roads and traffic will be a key issue on the minds of the voters

Another party to watch is Team Fouad Ahidar, a surprise newcomer in the June elections. Ahidar, a former MP with the Flemish socialist Vooruit, launched his own political movement focused on social justice and religious freedom, hitting on hot-button issues such as rules around the ritual slaughter of animals. In a development which surprised the Brussels establishment, the party managed to win three seats in the Brussels regional parliament.

His party draws strong support from working-class Muslim communities, particularly in the northern and eastern parts of Brussels, and his campaign has been described as grassroots and inclusive, transcending linguistic and ethnic divides. In the communal elections, Ahidar’s movement will be looking to expand its influence, especially in communes like Molenbeek, Schaerbeek and Anderlecht, with his platform focusing on housing, mobility and community safety.

Non-Belgian democratic deficit

One of the most interesting aspects of the 2024 communal elections is the participation of non-Belgian residents. For the first time, more than 50,000 non-Belgians have registered to vote in these elections, a significant milestone. However, this number is still a fraction of the 310,000 non-Belgian residents who are eligible, meaning that only 16% of the eligible voters could actually turn out.

There are several reasons for this low registration rate. Unlike Belgian citizens, non-Belgian residents are not automatically registered to vote and must complete a separate registration process by a specific deadline several months before the elections. This is compounded by a lack of uniform outreach efforts to inform non-Belgians of their rights, with local mayors and communes often taking a passive role in encouraging voter participation.

The complexity of the Brussels political system, coupled with linguistic fragmentation, further discourages participation. For non-EU residents, the situation is even worse: only about 9,000 non-EU citizens have registered to vote, a significant drop compared to the previous election.

This lack of participation represents a missed opportunity for Brussels democracy. In a city where nearly one-third of the population is non-Belgian, their voices could have a significant impact on local governance. Efforts to increase non-Belgian voter turnout will be crucial in future elections, particularly as Brussels continues to evolve as a multicultural and multilingual metropolis.

Why local power matters

While the communal elections in Brussels may lack the national drama of federal or regional elections, they are, in many ways, more important for the city’s residents. The communes wield significant power over the everyday lives of their citizens, from managing public spaces to ensuring safety and providing essential services.

With more than 50,000 non-Belgian residents registered to vote, making this a slightly different electorate to June’s elections, and parties like Team Fouad Ahidar rising in prominence, this election has the potential to reshape the political landscape of Brussels.

The communal elections will also provide crucial insights into the dynamics that will shape coalition negotiations at the regional level. In a fragmented city like Brussels, where local concerns often dominate political conversations, the results of the October elections will reveal much about the future direction of governance in the Belgian capital.

What voters could care about

Local elections have a different flavour to national, regional or European polls. While some voters are tribal and will stick to the same party whatever the election, others will look at what their local representatives have done for them

Here are the key issues that are likely to dominate the political debate.

  • Mobility and Public Space: The Good Move plan, which seeks to curb car traffic and improve the quality of public spaces, remains deeply divisive. While the plan has strong support from environmentalists and young professionals, it has faced fierce opposition from car owners and business groups. Communes like Schaerbeek and Anderlecht have become flashpoints in the mobility debate. Some supportive candidates could try to move on from the Good Move branding while supporting the overall reform of public space. But opponents are likely to continue using it to score points – and sap votes from green candidates in particular.
  • Housing: The affordability and quality of housing remain major issues in Brussels, where rising rents and deteriorating building conditions have left many residents frustrated. Candidates will need to present concrete plans for raising affordable housing stock and improving living conditions in neglected neighbourhoods. These debates also have a strong undercurrent of anxiety and concern around gentrification and affordability in people’s neighbourhoods - a concern in a city where one-third of its inhabitants are classified as at risk of poverty.
  • Cleanliness and public services: Rubbish disposal is a regional competence, but the cleanliness of Brussels streets is the responsibility of the communes. In a city where complaints about litter and illegal dumping are common, candidates will need to address how they plan to improve public services at the local level. Mayors will be judged on their ability to deliver cleaner streets and better maintenance of public spaces.
  • Safety and security: Rising concerns about drug-related crime and violence, particularly in neighbourhoods around major train stations like Gare du Midi and Gare du Nord, are making security a key issue. Candidates will need to demonstrate how they plan to improve safety in their communes.


Latest News

Copyright © 2025 The Brussels Times. All Rights Reserved.