The Mouvement Réformateur launched its 2026 New Year tour in La Louvière, at the heart of Hainaut, bringing together elected representatives, activists, entrepreneurs and citizens around a shared goal: reindustrialise, put work back at the centre, and embrace bold reforms to durably lift the old industrial basins out of stagnation. Between Adrien Dolimont’s plea to “make information triumph”, Roland Duchâtelet’s call to reconcile industry with smart taxation, and the very concrete concerns raised by local SMEs, the congress set the tone for a year in which the MR wants to combine truthful figures, support for enterprise and a demand for results.
President Georges-Louis Bouchez's speech gave this morning its political backbone, linking the defence of freedom of expression, energy and industrial sovereignty, time-limiting unemployment benefits, cutting public spending, firmness on security, and pride in being Belgian.
Find his speech below
Good afternoon, everyone. First of all, I would like to thank our teams who organised this event, and all of you for being here. Because, in fact, for the Mouvement Réformateur, travelling around Brussels and Wallonia today has become complicated. It has become complicated because we have a handful of people who have self-proclaimed themselves “antifa” or defenders of “the good cause”, who believe that public debate is no longer conducted with words but with violence. And so, across all our events, we have had to deplore the mobilisation of police forces, not at our request, let me be clear, and I would like our friends in the press to make that clear too, because I am very surprised to gradually see a reversal of responsibility, as though we were responsible for the material and physical attacks we are subjected to. Of course, it is always possible to oppose us. Belgium is a land of debate, a liberal land indeed. But it must never become acceptable or normal for violent welcoming committees to be waiting at our various events, for us to be threatened, or for us to be asked to change venue. Does that mean that today, if you are a liberal in Belgium, there are neighbourhoods off-limits to you? Can democrats accept that? Shouldn't my fellow presidents of democratic parties be standing up today? Because today it is the MR. But tomorrow, it will be others. As liberals, we must never give up this freedom to travel, to think, to speak, to propose. So, today, a welcoming committee was supposedly planned. I saw that, in the end, we were left in peace. Two possibilities: either they are mourning their friend Maduro, which is always possible, or they will wait for the thaw to make their revolution. But for the rest, I want to say a huge thank you. Because despite these threats, you have never been so numerous at our events. You have never been so numerous as members of the Mouvement Réformateur. You have to go back 15 years to find as many members. You have never mobilised in such numbers. So, for that, I would like to begin the year with just one word: thank you. I spoke about freedom of expression that must be preserved. This freedom of expression seems natural to us, so natural that some, in the end, do not realise how precious it is. But I do not want to go any further in my speech without mentioning a country and a situation: Iran. There, you can see true courage, the courage of those protesters facing down some twenty regime motorcyclists ready to beat them. True courage is that of the women and men prepared to pay with their lives for the establishment of a liberal project. So, we liberals must always stand alongside these women and men, everywhere in the world, who fight for freedom, who fight for equality, who fight for the possibility of having competing political projects that clash with one another. Because yes, ladies and gentlemen, division is the engine of democracy. It is not the problem, it is the solution. This division must of course remain within the framework of debate. It must rest on the strength of arguments. But this division does not exist in a country like Iran. Today, in Iran, either you follow the regime, or you die. And the worst part is that, once again, in our own country, this situation goes almost unnoticed by the mainstream media. So yes, ladies and gentlemen, I wanted to highlight these women and men today. Because, as I said, that is true courage. Because they know that these values matter more than their own lives. So, ladies and gentlemen, I really ask you to applaud them, not to forget them, and above all to make their fight known, to support them, and to support all liberal movements around the world. This courage must be the guiding thread of our political action. This courage is what the European Union lacks today. It has preferred the comfort of posturing to the courage of facing the harshness of reality. Europe cannot claim to defend its values as long as it does not defend its sovereignty. And international events remind us of this ever more. I will not dwell on whether we are living through unprecedented times, I don't believe we are. Precedents existed many years ago: unilateral military interventions, as in Iraq; kidnappings; government destabilisations, these have always existed. The real question is that, whether we like it or not, this is the world we live in today. And we cannot be sincere in our desire to defend our values if we are not fully committed to defending our sovereignty. That is why I fought for nuclear power in Belgium. This debate was presented as a political battle. It goes far beyond that. It is a civilisational issue, it is a matter of sovereignty, because today, if Europe is sincere in defending its values, it must regain military autonomy. It must regain energy autonomy. It must regain industrial autonomy. To regain this autonomy, we will have to fight against the “3 Ss”, not Superman, but super-taxation, super-regulation, and socialism. This idea that we could share wealth before creating it. This idea that by creating more and more rules, we will help progress. This idea that by taxing more and more, we will create more well-being. This model has proven a failure. Of course, we must preserve solidarity. Of course, we must regulate. Of course, we must share. But we must also return to the essence of what makes this possible: industry, the economy, investment. We must recreate this wealth before sharing it. Today, we are sharing debt, that is, we are placing the cost of our own lives on the shoulders of our children. If you have children, ask yourself this: would you have the idea of going to a restaurant tonight, ordering champagne, lobster and caviar, and then calling your son or daughter to tell them they need to come by the restaurant to pay the bill? Is there anyone in this room who would think that was good behaviour? And yet, that is what we are doing. That is what we do every day by living the way we live, that is, by borrowing to pay public sector wages, to pay subsidies, to pay for comfort. I refuse to accept that. Of course, it would be much easier for my own political career not to talk about this. To take everything we can while there is still something to take. And after us, the deluge? That is not our conception of politics. If we go into politics, it is not for the next elections. It is for the next generations. And we will only be worthy of our mandate if we have the courage to act for the next generations. So, Europe is not some outside entity. Europe is us. Europe begins with the reforms we are going to establish in Belgium. And today, we are celebrating the implementation of a major reform whose impact we cannot yet fully measure: the time-limiting of unemployment benefits. I can already see, here and there, a few self-proclaimed great experts and intellectuals explaining to us that this is the end of the world. But lifelong unemployment benefits were such a good idea that no country in the world copied us. Not even Jean-Luc Mélenchon, Maduro's friend, proposes such a thing. But the Walloon Socialist Party defended this idea. Even better, they said that lifelong unemployment does not exist. That's what the baker from Charleroi says when he's up against the butcher from Mons in a debate. He told me: “But Mr Butcher, you're lying. I'm the mayor of Charleroi, I see people every day who want a job.” I told him: “Yes, Mr Magnette, that's true. But in Mons, I see people every day who no longer look for work. Because they think solidarity is a cash machine.” So this two-year limit on unemployment benefits is more than a budgetary saving. It is a cultural reform. It is a change of mindset. It sends a clear signal: solidarity goes both ways. We must be able to receive when life deals us a hard blow. But we must also be able to give, to contribute, when we have the capacity to do so, even if that capacity is limited. The State is nobody other than each and every one of us. So yes, this time-limiting of unemployment benefits, which was put in place extremely quickly by the cabinet, by the teams and by David Clarinval, is a major change. Because it is the first step that will help revive regions like La Louvière. Look, journalist friends here present, if you're worried about the impact of this time-limiting of unemployment benefits, look instead at what unlimited unemployment benefits have created. Go to those neighbourhoods where inactivity has become the only horizon. Go to those streets where children no longer even think they can change social class, conditions or trade. Go and see the consequences. I can tell you one thing: this reform is only the first of many others. This reform is essential, it sends a signal: work is returning to the heart of society. The other challenge will be to better reward that work, and therefore to cut taxes. But there will be no tax cuts unless we reduce public spending, and I will come back to that. The left's solution is quite different. It is to tell us we must tax “the broadest shoulders”. It's true, we must tax the broadest shoulders. I can sense a few people starting to sweat. Don't worry. Because to find the broadest shoulders, I stationed myself outside a gym. And I looked at the men and women with big shoulders. Imagine my surprise to see a gentleman in a red T-shirt with big shoulders, and a lady in a green T-shirt. So I looked into who these people were. And do you know who it was? The mutual health insurance funds. Over €6 billion in assets. There they are, the broadest shoulders! It's not the small entrepreneur who may have earned enough to afford a second, third flat, or, heaven forbid, a few shares. No, €6 billion in assets, those are Stallone's shoulders. Those are the big shoulders. And you know what's best? Because I looked into it. These mutual funds have avoided €400 million in taxes over the past four years. Now, I didn't want to believe it. I told myself: that can't be right, Mr Labille, a man of the left, must surely have more virtue than others. He has moral superiority: he's a good man. I don't have those qualities myself… So I said to myself: he surely can't be seeking profit to that extent. Well, imagine my discovery: for the same services as a private insurer, for example DKV, the mutual funds pay no corporate tax. The socialists arranged for the law to clearly state that mutual funds do not pay corporate tax. €400 million escaping the State over four years. But there's more. Under the Vivaldi government, the left introduced a tax on large non-profits, for example, the Damien Foundation, the Little Sisters of the Poor, that is, non-profits with more than half a million euros in assets. I assumed the mutual funds were subject to it too. Well, no. It turns out there's a little clause in the text saying it doesn't apply to mutual funds. So how do these people have the decency to go around explaining that companies should pay more? How do these people have the nerve to go around explaining that they work for solidarity? It's quite mad, really. It's quite mad, solidarity that doesn't apply to themselves. And so I understood something. Solidarity, for the left, is not about defending the weakest. It's, as Brassens sang, “friends first”. It's about defending your mates. Taxes aren't the same for your mates. Now, I won't go on too long about the unions, but I can tell you there are a few gems of the same kind there too. Today, the Mouvement Réformateur is making a very concrete proposal: subject mutual funds to the same taxes as everyone else. Simply that. Nothing more, nothing less. This will allow us to save at least €165 million every year. And we are proposing this not to make a budgetary saving, but in the interest of solidarity: to halve the tax on workers during their first year of work, so that people entering the labour market can start life with greater capital. If they are sincere in their approach, they will agree to be subject to the same taxes as everyone else, and above all they will agree that this tax should allow women and men to start out in life. Because, as I said, we must lower taxes. But there is not a single person in this room who could sincerely defend that idea if, at the same time, we do not defend the reduction of public spending. Our country has too much public spending. There are too many policies. There are too many structures. There are too many administrations. So you can explain whatever you like in your municipalities, saying it's the federal government's fault, that it's the region's fault. That's not true. In the municipalities too, there is work that can be done. But it is true that at federal and regional level, there is colossal work to be done. And today, if we continue with the same volume of public spending, given inflation and indexation, you will only increase public spending year after year, and so you will all be forced to raise taxes. So today, I ask you, as liberals, whatever your level of power, to no longer resort to this easy solution. I committed to “zero new taxes”. That is what earned people's trust in us. And it is not enough to say that others will pay, that it's the federal government's fault, that it's the region's fault. No. We are all responsible for the level we manage. I know local levels are complicated, but I also know that this reduction in public spending can be achieved with extremely simple measures. And I ask you all to simply look at the Netherlands. I haven't chosen an underdeveloped country: it's one of the richest countries in the world. It's the country with the highest pension level in Europe. It's one of the countries with the highest income per capita. And do you know what's happening in the Netherlands? They merged the municipalities. In the Netherlands, there is a single government. There are provinces, but with reduced powers. They have reduced public structures. That is the path we must follow. That is why Adrien Dolimont and our ministers in the Walloon government have moved forward on abolishing the provinces as a political level. And I want to reassure the civil servants who provide services to the public: this will not affect you. The teacher in the provincial network will continue to be a teacher. We need them. But do they really need a provincial MP above their head? Do they need so many provincial councillors? I don't believe so. Can we one day look squarely at merging municipalities and CPAS (public social welfare centres)? Because, yes, the director-general can be shared between the two. Because, yes, the head of personnel should be shared between the two. Because, yes, there's no reason the IT system should be different. Because, yes, there are enormous economies of scale. But I will go one step further. We must put on the table the merger of municipalities so that every municipality in Wallonia has at least 15,000 inhabitants. The saving for the Walloon Region would be €160 million every year. And I chose a modest figure: 15,000 inhabitants. This isn't New York. I'm not asking you to live in dehumanised municipalities. It remains a reasonable, achievable figure. And I say this because the example must come from us: we will be the party most affected by this reform. Because today, we are the party with 107 mayors, twice as many as our nearest rival. And so, if municipalities are merged, the MR will be the one losing the most mayors. But are we here to hold offices, or are we here to serve people? Are we here to give people's money back to them, or are we here to occupy positions? Today, I think our choice is clear. I will launch an initiative within the MR, with our various mayors, to set the example first. So that we can be at the forefront of municipal mergers that will generate savings. We must also move forward on the overall reduction in the number of political mandates. We must reduce the number of elected officials in our country by 20 to 30%. We must make the state apparatus more efficient, and therefore evaluate all public policies. I know some of you will say: “What a fine New Year he's wishing me, telling me my mandate is disappearing…” But why do we do politics? We do politics to change things. And for me, the only thing that matters in 2029 is that we can all look at ourselves in the mirror and say that one day our children will thank us. So think about it, and above all, we must absolutely move forward with these reforms in Wallonia and Brussels. We will also have to, and this is our other priority, work on security, since I mentioned Brussels. How much longer are we going to accept the images we've seen in Mr Laaouej's municipality after a football match? There's something I've never understood, and I am a football supporter: when they lose, they smash things up, but when they win, they smash things up too. So is the difference in what they smash up? Maybe they don't smash the same things… Are we still going to accept fireworks being used against police forces? I would like to take this opportunity, I know Bernard is with us, to once again thank the police forces present here, as well as all the security forces of our country, because today they are not respected enough, and that must change. At the risk of making some people shudder, I say it here: the vandal must become the payer. It is no longer acceptable for people's taxes to be used to repair brand-new bus shelters that have just been destroyed by thugs. Illegal residents must be sent back. Because our country is a land of welcome, but with rules. Today, nearly 80% of arrests in Brussels involve people in an irregular situation, who are true cannon fodder for mafia organisations and drug trafficking, because the State seems completely at a loss. We must dry up and close the routes of illegal immigration. We must send back the more than 120,000 people who are in an irregular situation. We must, above all, ensure that the 43% of prisoners in Belgium today who are not Belgian nationals serve their sentences in their country of origin. Solidarity must go to the women and men who respect the law, who respect the rules, who respect our country. Not to those who came here to commit crimes. And I say this clearly to my government colleagues: we are making this our top priority. There will be no more room for excuses or fanciful explanations. Nothing can explain why Belgium has twice as many foreign national prisoners as the European average. Nor can anything explain such a rise in populism, racism and extremism, all because a handful of people give a bad image to the thousands of our fellow citizens who came here to work, to integrate, to build and develop Belgium. So yes, we will be humane, we will be fair, but the time for firmness and sanction must return. To that end, we will also propose tightening the conditions for obtaining Belgian nationality. Today, in our country, it is possible to become Belgian despite having failed one's integration pathway. Today, public prosecutors say they are no longer able to verify the conditions for obtaining Belgian nationality. And I want to say this, even though I know it is not the custom in our country: I would like us to rediscover pride in being Belgian. Because our country is extraordinary. Because our country is not small at all. Our country matters. Our country, abroad, is often held in much higher esteem than we ourselves believe. And diplomat Bernard Quintin won't contradict me on that. Our country is a land of progress. It is a liberal land. It is a land of knowledge, a land of learning. So yes, we want to tighten the conditions for obtaining Belgian nationality. Because obtaining Belgian nationality is not a right: it is an honour. Belgian nationality must be earned. Belgian nationality is what unites us, and it must unite us around values. So yes, our message is universal. Yes, our country will welcome all people of good will. But yes, our country must be respected by everyone. Now, I mentioned the situation in Brussels. In Brussels, you've seen they want to form an anti-Bouchez coalition. For 21 years they've formed an anti-MR coalition, but this time they said: “Let's change it up, let's call it the anti-Bouchez coalition.” Quite a coalition, isn't it! It's the Good Move coalition. It's the coalition of immobile mobility. It's the coalition of bankruptcy. Every year, Brussels loses thousands of middle-class people who decide to go and live elsewhere. It's the coalition of filth. It's the coalition of insecurity. So let me tell you: I am proud that it's an anti-Bouchez coalition. I am proud because a coalition with the MR is a coalition that reforms. It's a coalition that is not afraid of change. It's a coalition that looks the harshness of reality in the eye. So Brussels needs us more than ever. And so, while they keep talking, we will keep working. I announce today that we will table in the Brussels Parliament all the proposals contained in the notes drawn up by David Leisterh and myself. Because that work was serious. That work was done with all our staff. That work was done with the administrations. And I will not accept that people who do not respect the electoral result, and who decided, despite that result, to sit in their ministerial seats after being significantly punished by voters, should tarnish our work. I'm not saying this for myself. I'm used to it. Besides, I try not to read the press any more, as I've already told you. If I believed what's in the papers, I wouldn't vote for myself any more. I say this for our teams. Because the MR in Brussels means 20 MPs. It means dozens of staff. It means people at party headquarters who have worked for Brussels, who have carried the debate into the neighbourhoods, who have gone everywhere to convince people. And these people sent a signal: they said “What we want is the MR”. Well, now we're going to unmask them. We're going to table the texts in Parliament on Good Move. We're going to table texts on cleanliness. We're going to table texts on security. We're going to table texts on unemployment, on economic redeployment, on lowering taxes. And we'll see who shows up. We'll see who votes, who really loves Brussels. But I tell you, ladies and gentlemen, whatever happens: do not lose heart. Do not apologise. Do not be afraid. What we are doing is what citizens expect: it is change, it is reform. People voted for this. We must not apologise by saying: “Oh, I'm sorry, I had no choice but to take this decision…” The decisions we make are just decisions. They are decisions we defended during the election campaign. Who hadn't heard that we wanted to time-limit unemployment benefits? Who hadn't heard that we wanted to cut public spending? Who wasn't aware that we wanted to strengthen security, fight illegal immigration? Who hadn't heard that we wanted to put industry back at the heart of our economic activity? So yes, ladies and gentlemen, political struggle is hard. Very hard. But I have a message for you. A great party is not built in the euphoria of victorious election nights. It is built in the daily hardship of reform. A great party is not built with the smiles of swearing-in ceremonies. It is built through daily companionship. In this shared work, because we believe in a vision for society and because that vision is necessary for Belgium. And if you doubt it, read the papers: even the baker from Charleroi no longer wants to reverse the unemployment reform. But then I have a question: why are they protesting? Today, they are protesting even though they will not reverse any of our reforms. They will not change the pension rules. They will not change the unemployment rules. They will not change the security rules. They will not change the labour reforms. And why won't they change them? Because these are the only reforms that are useful for the country. Because these reforms are inescapable. And above all because they have no alternative solution. So, Paul and Raoul, I have a message for you. Stop blocking the country. Stop making the economy lose tens of millions of euros with every day of strikes, and therefore making the working women and men of our country lose out too. Be useful. Take note of the left's failure. Take note of the failure in Charleroi, in Liège, in La Louvière, in Mons, in all the former industrial basins dominated by the left. And be humble. Use this time to reflect on your failures. And come back, not too soon, but at least by election time, into the debate with, perhaps, some ideas, some alternatives. But hurling insults at the MR, or at me personally, will never build a vision for society. A vision for society is made of ideas. It is an ideal. It is a path. And that path is not always easy. I tell you, ladies and gentlemen: not every day will be easy. But we will have the great satisfaction of being able to work in the interest of our country. So, for 2026, I wish you happiness. Courage. And, more than ever, pride in being liberals!