The Marshall Plan: the Walloon neoliberal recipe 
Michael Verbauwhede

Rough translation from: http://www.marx.be/fr/content/le-plan-marshall-la-recette-n%C3%A9olib%C3%A9rale-wallonne

"The  Walloon ambition is changing its nature, a new Walloon spirit, creative and serene is being born," said Paul Magnette (President of the Socialist Party), during the Wallonia Festival [53]. Jean-Claude  Marcourt (Walloon Minister of Economy), for his part, likes to remind us of the all-round success of "his" Marshall Plan, with 46,388 jobs created (or to be created ...) [54]. "Wallonia in full recovery" is the title for his article in La Libre Belgique of July 2013.

So Wallonia is recovering, after thirty years of economic mess? How about these statements? Does The Marshall Plan actually have an effect on the Walloon economy? What is the economic strategy behind the Marshall Plan? These are a few questions that we will attempt to shed a light on in the following pages.

The Walloon economy in the Belgian context

A Wallonia that exceeds Flanders?

Start with placing the Walloon economic situation in the Belgian context. 

Following the raving comments by the government on the Marshall Plan and its global economic policy, or the UWE [55], we should understand that the Walloon economics show a strong economic growth and above all one that is higher than the one in Flanders (which is the alleged main goal).

According to a CBC report [56], the Walloon GDP growth for the period from 2000 to 2012 is identical to the period between 1990-1999 (about 1.5% per year on average, but strong variations are observed within periods).
What makes Walloon politicians trumpet, is that Walloon growth exceeds Flemish growth. Not that the Walloon growth increases, simply the Flemish growth decreases as seen in Figure 1. In fact, the average Walloon growth is stable  (between 1 and 2% a year on average) since the 1973 crisis, while the Flemish growth tends to decline, and is joining Wallonia. Contrary to the claims of UWE that "Wallonia outperforms Flanders" it means that the Flemish growth in the long term, adjusts itself to the Walloon economic growth.


If we analyze the most recent period, it appears that each Belgian region wants to show that its territory is more competitive or that it is recovering more easily than the other. Some data indicate a gap. But in the long term [read: the last fifteen years], it appears that the reports are relatively stable [57]. "Whether in terms of trade balance, geographical distribution (regional) Belgian added value, the annual growth of Belgian GDP, Walloon, Flemish or Brussels, the regional economic structure shows impressive stability over the past fifteen years. In any event, it would be wrong to say that the Marshall Plan has brought significant growth for its almost ten years of operation, unlike  the adventurous affirmations of the Walloon Government.

"Through the Marshall Plan, we created 46,388 jobs"

If growth is not what this is about, maybe we should turn to job creation?  According to Marcourt, based on the figures in the official report to the government in mid-2013, 46388 jobs were created through the  Marshall Plan (2006 to 2012). These figures are shown with pride by the Walloon government. What to think? 

Firstly, the report makes it clear that these figures are about jobs, or "promises of jobs."  We have no more details about these job promises.  Moreover, no indication is given as to the calculation methodology of these jobs and their relation with the Marshall Plan. We find additional guidance from elsewhere, that qualify these job creations so far. According to Philippe Defeyt, "in 2010, almost all of the net jobs created (annual average) in Wallonia are jobs that bring little or cost little, to social security [58]." What do they cost? These are essentially subsidized jobs: "The recovery [in 2010] in employment seems to have originated in large part in subsidized  employment [service-vouchers, win-win programs, etc.] [59]" Philippe Defeyt also considers (for the 2008-2012 period for all of Belgium) that "it is only through the industries that are extensively or completely funded (service-vouchers, health and social services ...) that employment increases [60]."  Furthermore, "the figures would have been worse if the National Employment Office did not fund measures for temporary unemployment (for employees at the beginning of the crisis) and the re-organization of working time [61]."

Furthermore, the unemployment rate remains high in Wallonia, and follows the same trends as the unemployment rate in Flanders. According to the report by CBC, the unemployment rate has even increased 0.2% between 2008 and 2013 in Wallonia. Subsequently, the three Regions would see, according to forecasts of the Federal Planning Bureau, the unemployment rate go down only in 2018 [62].


Note that curves of past and future (projections) for unemployment in Wallonia and Flanders, though they are not parallel, still follow a similar trend. On the one hand, it is risky to give total credit to government  assertions that attribute the creation of 46,388 jobs to the Marshall  Plan. On the other hand, as for GDP growth, we see that Wallonia does not  follow a fundamentally different path from that of the region to which it compares itself (Flanders). In conclusion, it is necessary to question the Walloon economic policy, since obviously, it does not bear fruit.

The economic policy at the Walloon level

The origins: the economic situation in the early 2000s

According to politicians and historians of the Marshall Plan, the origin of the plan (and its various versions) is to be found in the economic backwardness of Wallonia compared to Flanders. Economic studies show that Wallonia has a lower share than Flanders in the Belgian GDP (in proportion to its population). The employment rate and income are lower than the Belgian average. This is what alerted the Walloon decisionmakers. Note the tendency to compare Flanders to Wallonia. It's not the employment of Wallonia itself that was sufficient to worry policymakers, but the fact that the employment rate is lower than that of Flanders [63].

The Contract for the Future of Wallonia and the Marshall Plan

Since 1999, the Walloon Government [64] is working towards the economic recovery of Wallonia. First through the Contrat d’avenir pour la Wallonie (CAW, 1999), followed by the Marshall Plan (PM) and the Plan Marshall 2.Vert. In 1999, Elio Di Rupo is already maneuvering for the CAW. The CAW already aims to bring the GDP growth rate and the employment rate of Wallonia at the Belgian and European average. In 2004, one has chosen new ones [a new government], and we make a new start: cdH ('centre démocrate Humaniste') arrives in the government, which in 2005 launches the first PM. 
The stated goal is to economically recover Wallonia. To do this, the Walloon government will target some areas as "for the future", strategic areas that it will concentrate its financial efforts on. The objective is also to "change the mentality" of the Walloons. "The Marshall Plan mobilizes budget resources in Wallonia and uses almost all the instruments Walloon politicians have at their disposal: regional, provincial and local tax reduction, investment aids, research assistance, training assistance, export support, attracting foreign investment, consolidation of brownfield sites, creation of new business areas ... It also mobilizes all stakeholders in the Walloon economic life: the social partners, enterprises, universities, research centers, administrations ... The prevailing impression is that of a general mobilization: all troops and weapons are now on the front [65]."
Without calling attention to it, the Walloon government commits to the neoliberal agenda of the European Commission, the Lisbon Strategy and Europe 2020: the European knowledge economy is to become the most competitive and dynamic of the world by 2020. This includes a target of a 75% employment rate, investments in research and development, and training up of the workforce. 
Fully funded by Wallonia, the means liberated for the Marshall Plans are important: 1.054 billion euros for the first and 1.6 billion euros for the Marshal Plan 2.vert. Note that these resources come, among others, from the sale of part of the shares of Arcelor (180 million). To these 2.7 billion, alternative financing is being added, a nice way of saying: debt, knowing that this money will need to be paid back at some time, some way or another by the region: 500.000.000 euros for the first Marshall Plan and 1.15 billion euros for 2.vert.

The Walloon industrial policy

Competitive clusters, industrial choices in the Marshall Plan

For many, the Marshall Plans coincide with "poles of competitiveness" and the policy of clustering. This is indeed an important element in the Walloon economic and industrial policy of the last ten years, although it does not mean this is the only one. Furthermore, there is a notable difference with Flanders [66]: the Walloon government has decided to focus on certain areas. 
A cluster is a formal network of companies, training organizations and research and development units (public or private) that produce synergies around common innovative projects. These partnerships are organized around a market (sector) and a technological or scientific field. The goal is to reach a critical mass to compete, gain international visibility, boost exports and attract foreign investors [67]. This policy is not unique to Wallonia. We indeed find the term 'competitiveness clusters' (along with other ways of calling them) in other European states (Germany, France), and even in Morocco. The idea is not new and comes from a 19 century economist called ... Alfred Marshall [68]! This is actually an 'innovative application' (in the case of writing) of the Lisbon strategy, which wants to make the EU the most competitive economy in the world by 2020 [69].
In the first Marshall Plan, The Walloon government has identified five clusters: BioWin (life sciences), MecaTech (Mechanical Engineering), Logistics in Wallonia  (logistics), SkyWin (aeronautics) and Wagralim (agribusiness). A sixth was created in 2010: GreenWin (materials and green chemistry). 
Based on work by Henri Capron (ULB), the criteria determining the choice of competitive clusters include firstly the achievements of a sector (number of companies, employees, research centers, patent, etc.),  but also the investments and its economic, technological, scientific prospects. Rather than relying on the economic structure of Wallonia and the needs of the population [70], the challenge is to subsidize strategic sectors that have development potential internationally: is there a Walloon world leader in this domain?  What is the growth potential? What propensity to export? These are the questions that the government asks. Which lead them to drop out of the steel industry; this sector did not pass the test in the first selection round, and is being abandoned. 
Competitive clusters notably work on the basis of 'research calls'. Different actors may use public funds to co-finance innovative research.  But even if the public sector (the region) is co-financing research, no warranty is asked in terms of job development or the public ownership of a potential patent. Ultimately, the companies own the patents, that they can then use as they see fit. This can lead to economic activities, but nothing obliges these companies to develop those economic activities in Wallonia. They may well decide to develop businesses in another country. 
Take the example of the cluster Logistics in Wallonia. Some believe that the development of logistics will help develop employment, particularly in areas where job losses are foreseen. Thus, in Liège, one of the ideas that have been put forward, is to replace the jobs lost in the industry by developing the logistics sector. Liège is indeed a remarkable location, at the crossroads of rivers, highways and European railways" [71]. It's the idea of the development of the Trilogiport in Liège, a trimodal platform water-rail-road. It could generate up to 2000 jobs, say the project's advocates [72]. 
As already shown by Damien Robert, half the tonnage of the port of Liège is related to the steel industry, "reconversion [including into logistics] without keeping the steel industry, would be nonsense. The steel industry is the backbone of the economy Liège [...]. 50% of the added value, tonnage and direct port jobs are directly related to metallurgy and steel industry.  It is therefore unthinkable to speak of conversion without mentioning to keep the steel industry running [73]."

The development of logistics leads to fierce competition between European regions, between Belgian regions and Walloon sub-regions. So, the idea of developing logistics throughout Europe is put forward by the European Commission. Flanders for example is also developing a "Logistics" pole in their plan Vlaanderen in Actie. The struggle between the two regions is so much raging at this level, that they have both sponsored 'scientific' studies executed by the same agency (!) to prove that each region was the champion of logistics at an European level. In its report submitted to the Flemish government, the consulting firm estimated that Flanders was the champion of logistics in Europe and the report submitted to the Walloon Government, Wallonia is the champion of logistics in Europe. According to Mathieu Strale, a researcher at the ULB, it was enough for the consultancy firm to change a criterion to influence the outcome [74], without a doubt as was expected by the region that was commisioning them. 
The industrial choice of the Marshall Plan is to leave decisions in the hands of multinationals (as we have seen with Mittal) and to try to support innovation (through clusters), in order to create jobs. But as we have seen with the abandonment of the steel industry, this policy is doomed to failure. Consequence of this choice: maintaining the Walloon traditional industry will depend on the profit that shareholders may draw from it.

Attracting investors

Another objective of the Marshall Plan is to attract foreign investors. The underlying logic to the Walloon economic policy is the sacrosanct belief in the power of business to create economic activities. It is hoped that thereby jobs are created. The wealth generated by these economic activities, created by companies, then "trickle down" to the whole of the Walloon population. This pushes the government to attract the largest possible number of international companies (multinationals) to set up on Walloon territory. Rather than creating economic activities itself, the government is trying to attract a multinational to a location A (in this case Wallonia) rather than to a place B (Flanders, another European region). It is a gigantesque plan to compete with other regions, and primarily with Flanders. 
A striking example: Colruyt supermarkets just built warehouses and a logistics center in Wallonia (in Ghislenghien, a few hundred meters from the  linguistic border) rather than in Flanders (where the group already has many facilities, including in Halle), while Colruyt Group is a Flemish group at its basis. Colruyt has just decided to enjoy the more favorable economic climate in Wallonia than in Flanders (land, taxation). 
Walloon companies that expand their activities abroad, as is the case now with Magotteaux (the 10% in 2011 still held by the Walloon Region were sold to a Chilean company [75]) are also valued, and put forward as the symbol of the success of Wallonia. 
But how is the government to attract foreign investors? In other words: what is the recipe for the government to economically develop their region? 

Clean, prepare and give land

First of all, by making terrains "ready to use".

The first Marshall Plan has already cost the government 74 million euros for the remediation of sites (formerly polluted by other companies) and to prepare them as ground for economic activities. In terms of alternative financing, €243 million were spent on the remediation of polluted industrial sites, €100 million on non-polluted abandoned industrial sites and 231 million euros for the preparation of new areas of activity. The Marshall Plan 2.vert spends €225 million to clean up and rehabillitate contaminated sites and 182.5 million euros to continue the equipment of "reception areas" for economic activities. 
Nearly one billion euros was therefore devoted to this goal in the Marshall Plans 1 and 2.vert and the Marshall Plan in 2022 will continue in this direction. Other funds are also planned in this direction, including European funds (ERDF) and other Walloon investments. So companies can land on ready-to-use zones.
A notable example of the sanitation policy (and de-pollution) of soil is provided by the pollution by former factories. "Focus on Houdeng (La Louvière) to [visit] Safea. [...] The beautiful remains of the company manufacturing nitrogen fertilizers, stretch out over 17 hectares [...].  Next to the large unusual instruments and fearsome-looking bottles, there is an ubiquitous logo: a skull.  It is true that the chemical plant did not produce cotton candy. The signs installed by the firm that started to rehabilitate the site are  clear: asbestos here, ferrocyanide there, in this area you are advised to wear a mask ... The website walsols.be also points at the presence of hydrocarbons, mineral oils, tars, sulfates, ammonium ... [76]"
The Safea factory was established in 1929 by the Gustave Boël Factories and the Belgian Chemical Union (UCB) and closed down in 1978. After several detours, the site will be taken over by Duferco and then bought by the Société publique d’aide à la qualité de l’environnement (Spaque) in order for it to be cleaned up, not at the expense of the owners (who nevertheless drew huge profits from this plant), but with money from the Marshall Plan (10 million euros for this site).
The cleared sites or brownfields are then prepared for the reception of new businesses. To illustrate this, we all remember the images of a triumphant Elio Di Rupo on the (real) site of Google in Mons. After investing 250 million euros in the site in 2010 [77] and supposedly having created 120 jobs, Google announced its plans to invest 300 million more and double the area it occupies. Could this be the symbol of the success of these business areas of equipment plans?
This calls for some comments: 120 jobs announced by Google proved to actually be a maximum of 40 direct jobs (in 2011) and the remainder in indirect jobs (including those in security companies). "IDEA manages a zoning of 3400 hectares that housed by the end of 2011 21.469 jobs. This is an average of 6.3 jobs per hectare. Even with 120 employees, the Google data center comes to barely 1.5 full-time per ha. Four times less than the average [78]. "According to Le Vif, Google the investment project would (in 2009) have received 12.5 million euros in public subsidies.
Google also benefits from notional interests (intérêts notionnels) through its subsidiary created for the occasion (Crystal Computing). Another element: "The land of 85 hectares they purchased for just under 13 euros per square meter is a golden nugget. Connected with fiber optic, located along the Nimy-Blaton canal, it allows them to operate an evaporative cooling system that is unique in the world, the data center operates without a cooling tower [...] [79]"
Finally, "there are no industrial terrains of this size remaining in Wallonia. [...] In other words, if today another big investor knocks at the door of the Mons-Borinage-Centre (or at any other city council) they would be forced to wait [80]."
These cases illustrate the Walloon economic policy in this area: Companies settle down, make profits while polluting the soil. Once their business is finished (or for some other reason), companies leave Wallonia, leaving behind polluted terrains. It is the task of the region to clean up and prepare the ground to make it cheap for new businesses. All the better if these companies create jobs, otherwise they will  participate in creating the "international scope of Wallonia".  This is what might be called the principle of the polluter-profiteer.

Sprinkle with tax breaks

Once prepared, to make the land grow well, it must be properly watered with tax breaks. Many measures introduced by the Walloon government to attract businesses, concern the suppression of taxes. The first Marshall Plan contained several measures of "un-economic tax relief." Part of the taxation of municipalities and provinces has been deleted: in the case of municipal or provincial tax on the force motrice, the industrial compensatory tax or the provincial tax (Hainaut) on land. The Walloon Region has awarded compensation to these local authorities for the missing funds. But the municipalities lost the fiscal leverage to potentially increase their revenues. An element not without consequences when we know the disastrous situation of municipal finances [81]. 
But the Walloon Region has also decided to remove other taxes: exemption from property tax on all investments in machinery and equipment acquired or constituted as new condition, removal of navigational rights, abolition of the tax on flows of beverages, reducing rates of inheritance tax for family buildings and the elimination of inheritance and gift taxes for business transfers. 
The cost of these measures in the first Marshall Plan was 70 million euros. For the Marshall Plan 2.vert, where this policy was continued, the bill was 60 million euros. 
More than 130 million have therefore been granted since 2006 in order to reduce taxes on businesses. They did not hesitate to blackmail the government to get their tax reductions granted. So, when a small laboratory (Eli Lilly) left Belgium in 2006, the big boss of GSK Biologicals and of course president of BioWin (the competitiveness cluster dedicated to health) estimated that the departure of this lab is "a new signal to Belgium. It has already tapped the nail to say that the pharmaceutical industry was not treated well. Although the government has taken some initiatives, it must continue to take fiscal measures to encourage companies that do research and development, because Belgium has to compete with other European countries that all act in this direction. [82]" GSK Biologicals has recovered € 1.3 million (taxes not due [83]). Two years earlier, the GSK Pharma (same group) was terminated in Wallonia. [84]
To these tax cuts must be added that "free zones" are created, ie areas where corporate taxation is lightened even further, and where support for entrepreneurship and economic activity are increased. The cost of these free zones for Walloon Region was estimated at 70  million euros for the first Marshall Plan and €55 million for the second.

Offer a docile workforce, ready to for use

There should also be a skilled workforce ready to properly operate the businesses settling on Walloon territory. The lack of training [85] of the workforce is seen by the government as one of the causes of the economic backwardness of the region. The stated objective is to increase the collaboration between stakeholders in education and training to make lifelong learning a reality of serving the Walloon economic development. 
The Walloon government considers education as a future training course for workers. The program must therefore meet the needs of companies (which in turn, should be more involved in the educational process).
Thus a decree in 2012 created dual training in non-university higher education, and Minister Marcourt (also Minister of Higher Education) wants to apply this in university education too. This type of training already takes place in secondary education (education centers and linked training, CEFA). The change is a formation in which half of the course the student is taking place within the walls of the school, the other half inside the businessess. Course content is in line with corporate training. The student is trained in a profession, for a company, and in order to meet business needs. 
Other policies not covered explicitly in the Marshall Plan were implemented by the Minister of Education: reform of 'alternation' [work-study] (in high school), certification per unit (CPU) [86], the development of so-called 'basins of life' (and training centers within these 'basins of life') and the intention to create partnerships between local actors (education, training, companies). The Marshall Plan also involves companies in the training of "future workers" (by giving them training places, the promotion of technical trades, etc.) 
Another crucial point, is the need for languages. If the interest is to export Walloon companies, it is necessary to have a qualified workforce for this. Different Marshall Plans have therefore planned to pay for language courses or to provide scholarships to learn a language abroad. Minister Marcourt has even considered to make an Erasmus exchange for students in higher education mandatory. 
Without going into details, it is important to note that training for job seekers follows the same design.
This desire to link education to the business world also leads to Minister Marcourt wanting to regionalize education [87]. This would indeed be needed to manage these plans, within the same federal entity (the Region), and would put conomic policy and education policy at the service of the latter.
This also helps explaining the importance given to education in the new Marshall Plan in 2022: "a quality education and training oriented towards employment, personal and collective development."  Under a fancy title the reforms already initiated now (qualifying education reform, "adéquationnisme" and life long learning, CPU development of language skills, etc.) are being hidden.
If before, the policy was to provide general training for young people, and make businesses responsible for training them in a trade, the financial burden has moved here. Rather than making the company pay for training, the Walloon government (or the French Community) chooses to pay for training future workers that will be directly employable. The underlying logic is to socialize costs and privatize profits: the  state carries the cost of training, the businesses benefits from the training.  And when the worker trained in a trade are being dismissed, they will return to the educational system to make them able to work in a new company. Here again, the companies are given all freedom. They dictate their training needs based on their interests, leaving it to the Region to provide a trained workforce that is directly employable.

Package the whole in a good dose of marketing 

The Walloon economic measures are accompanied by a marketing policy that tries to show that Wallonia is attractive. A good example is provided by the change of the logo of Wallonia. The idea is to invest in a different image of Wallonia. Thus, the Walloon government spent nearly 2 million euros to change the logo of Wallonia and "improve the international reputation of Wallonia for business and specific audiences   [88]". According to Rudi Demotte, "The goal is to ensure the redeployment of the international image of Wallonia and to create an image that moves away from a past related to industries which are no longer of this time [89]."
Other examples of the government's marketing policy: only positive speech (on what basis?) on the success of the Marshall Plan, willingness to break the "dusty image" of Wallonia, masking social conflict [90], support export [91], etc.

Sprinkle with the Walloon nationalism recipe

Once the liberal recipe is ready, a dash of Walloon nationalism helps to win over all the Walloon population.
This is what the statements of Rudi Demotte about the "positive nationalism  of Wallonia" mean, they evoke the strange concept of a united and confident people [92]. Distancing himself somewhat from the Walloon Minister-President, Jean-Claude Marcourt evokes meanwhile a soft version: the "Walloon economic patriotism" ... of which we can't precisely grasp the difference with the positive nationalism of Demotte. Magnette, meanwhile, evokes the necessary emergence of a class of "Walloon entrepreneur patriots".
Statements without consequences? Certainly not [93]. Alongside these sensational declarations, the government comes into action, as with the 'warning committee' established by the government (Walloon) Di Rupo in 2004. The committee has intervened in social conflicts, such as that of AGC Automotive (former Splintex). It made Henri Mestdagh, President of UWE in 2004 state that "it is the image of the Walloon  Region, which suffers from such incidents and it is not good if we want to attract investors." The Marshall Plan 2.vert provided 5 million euros to strengthen the Walloon conscience, "source of mobilization [94]." The Marshall Plan 2022 goes even further: it plans to create a "Walloon Group of 10" [95].
To appeal to the economic patriotism of workers and employers (whatever you call it), is to erase the oppositions between social classes. It is trying to make workers and employers walk in the same direction, in working together to meet  the "challenge of competitiveness" of the neoliberal recipe that is the Marshall  Plan. This is also another way of selling the Socialist Party as the party capable of maintaining social peace in Wallonia [96]. This is convincing Walloon employers and workers that "if you unite, you and your kind will improve. " But as we have seen, it is mainly the economic situation of bosses that improves. Especially since the economic issues are beyond the scale of Wallonia [97].

Can we do anything?

Attracting investors by laying down at their feet and handing them the keys to the economy of a region, is that the only possibility to improve the economy? Certainly not. This is a political decision, taken by the ruling parties in Wallonia (as elsewhere in Belgium). An alternative exists [98], but it requires a radical departure from the current policy. Rather than aiming at competitiveness it means to put another logic  at the center: the needs of the population, the economic and industrial tradition of Wallonia (or rather, Belgium), and collective development. This would result in the development (on a Belgian scale) of four industrial sectors: construction, transport, health services and steel. These areas should be managed by the government, together with the population.
This economic and industrial choice would address the pressing needs of the Belgian  (and Walloon) population: the construction of housing, schools and other public infrastructure; broadening the supply of public transport; improving access to health care (and care for the elderly). And, best of all, it would create thousands of jobs.
The policy practiced by the Walloon government is diametrically opposite to that. This alternative requires the unmasking of the hypocrisy of the Walloon Government, and to challenge the figures put forward by it. The alternative springs from the construction of a power struggle that rejects the "Walloon patriotic collaboration" between employers and workers. Finally, the alternative will be built on the refusal of the downward spiral that is constituted by the fierce competition that Belgian Regions (and European) indulge in.

Conclusion 

Wallonia was sick, and continues to be. Unemployment does not decrease, inequalities are growing, businesses are closing, putting thousands of workers on the street.
The recipe of the Walloon government is to implement the European competitiveness strategy (Lisbon Strategy and Europe 2020). This neoliberal recipe is to let the big multinationals decide the future of  Wallonia and socio-economic situation of Walloon workers.
Unlike the Flemish policy, the Marshall Plan has focused resources on only a few areas (clusters). It also tries to encourage companies to settle cheaply on cleared and cleaned land, where they find a trained workforce, can benefit from investment incentives, and pay a minimum of taxes, all at the expense of the Walloon taxpayer.
Yet an alternative exists: to start from the Walloon industrial tradition and from the needs of the population. But to realize this alternative, one needs to reverse the trend that increases the welfare of the workers before the welfare of the bosses (Walloon or not).


Michael Verbauwhede (michael.verbauwhede at gmail.com) is a lawyer and historian. He works at research department of the Parti du Travail de Belgique.


[53] Belga, 13 septembre 2013.
[54] Le Soir, 30 août 2013.
[55] L’UWE  affirme que l’économie wallonne est en voie de redressement et montre  des signes encourageants, en comparaison avec la Flandre (RTBF Info, 21 mars 2013).
[56] CBC, KBC, Une Wallonie en pleine relance ?, juillet 2013.
[57] H. Houben, « La stratégie économique belge : s’agripper à la locomotive allemande », Études marxistes 104, nov. 2013, Bruxelles.
[58] P. Defeyt, « Marché du travail wallon : ne pas se réjouir trop vite. Actualisation », www.iddweb.be, janvier 2011 (consulté en juillet 2013).
[59] Ibid.
[60] P. Defeyt, « 2008-2012 : un marché du travail prévisible et étonnant à la fois », www.iddeweb.be, juillet 2013 (consulté en juillet 2013).
[61] Ibid.
[62] Bureau fédéral du plan, IWEPS, IBSA, SVR, Perspectives économiques régionales 2013-2018, juillet 2013.
[63] Accaputo, Bayenet, Pagano, Le Plan Marshall pour la Wallonie, CH CRISP 1919, 2006.
[64] Dans lesquels tous les partis ont été impliqués à un moment ou à un autre : PS, PSC/cdH, PRL/MR, Ecolo.
[65] Accaputo, Bayenet, Pagano, op. cit., p. 71.
[66] Voir P. De Vos, « La Flandre et le régionalisme néolibéral », Études marxistes, no 104, Bruxelles, nov. 2013, p. 26-44.
[67] « Les pôles de compétitivité. Philosophie générale », www.clusters.wallonia.be (consulté en août 2013).
[68] Sa théorie a été reprise par Michael Porter, économiste américain toujours en vie.
[69] H. Houben, « Une application à la lettre de la stratégie de Lisbonne », Politique, no 69, Bruxelles, 2011, p. 40.
[70] H. Houben, « Contre la désindustrialisation, changer de logique », Études marxistes, no 102, Bruxelles, 2013, p. 3.
[71] RTBF Info, 27 mars 2013.
[72] Voir le site du Trilogiport, http://www.portdeliege.be/fr/trilogiport (consulté en juillet 2013)
[73] D. Robert, « Emploi, sidérurgie et reconversion dans la région liégeoise », supplément Études marxistes, no 96, Bruxelles, oct. 2011, p. 34.
[74] « La Wallonie, championne de la logistique ? Un rapport sème le doute », RTBF Info, 19 décembre 2012.
[75] B. Bauraind, « Magotteaux est… chilienne ! », www.gresea.be (consulté en juillet 2013).
[76] M. Van Hees, « Devons-nous payer pour les milliardaires pollueurs ? », www.frerealbert.be (consulté en octobre 2013).
[77] La Libre Belgique, 4 octobre 2010.
[78] Le Vif-L’express, 27 avril 2013.
[79] Ibid.
[80] Ibid.
[81] K. Hostyn et K. Merckx, « La crise menace aussi les caisses communales », Études marxistes, no 97, Bruxelles, janvier 2012, p. 9-34.
[82] La Libre Belgique, 30 juin 2006.
[83] L’Écho, 29 avril 2011.
[84] La Dernière Heure, 12 février 2009.
[85] Et le manque d’adéquation entre la formation et les besoins des entreprises…
[86] Qui  consiste à « casser » la logique d’année, pour faire réussir des  « modules » ou « unités » aux élèves. Ces unités sont des ensembles de  compétences à acquérir, libellés en objectifs. Derrière un objectif  louable de réduire l’échec scolaire, se cache en réalité une volonté de  faire passer à la trappe la formation générale, pour se concentrer sur  l’acquisition de compétences directement utilisables par une entreprise.  « La plateforme de lutte contre l’échec scolaire et la CPU », www.skolo.org (consulté en octobre 2013).
[87] La Libre Belgique, 14 janvier 2012.
[88] Le Soir, 9 juillet 2013.
[89] La Libre Belgique, 27 juin 2013.
[90] On a ainsi relevé la création par le gouvernement wallon en 2004 d’un comité d’alerte, sorte de task force,  composée de politiques, de représentants du patronat et de  représentants des travailleurs dont la mission est d’intervenir dans une  entreprise dès qu’un conflit social s’y amorce. L’objectif est d’éviter  de donner « une mauvaise image » de la Wallonie. Un conflit social, ça  fait tache lorsqu’il s’agit d’attirer des investisseurs étrangers. La Libre Belgique, 24 juin 2004.
[91] Avec  la création de l’Agence wallonne pour l’exportation, le but est d’une  part de permettre aux entreprises wallonnes de trouver des débouchés  dans des pays étrangers, et d’autre part d’attirer des investisseurs en  Wallonie.
[92] La Libre Belgique, 21 août 2013.
[93] C. Le Paige, « Quand Magnette joue le jeu du nationalisme… et des patrons », www.ptb.be (consulté en octobre 2013).
[94] Nous dirions plutôt qu’il s’agit d’une source de « démobilisation ».
[95] Voir aussi les déclarations de Marcourt sur le « pacte social » pour animer la vie économique wallonne. La Libre Belgique, 14 septembre 2013.
[96] R. Hedebouw, Les maux bleus du Parti socialiste (postface de Priorité de gauche. Pistes rouges pour sortie de crise), Aden, Bruxelles, 2009, p. 266.
[97] H. Houben, « La stratégie économique belge… », op. cit. 
[98] H. Houben, « Contre la désindustrialisation, changer de logique », op. cit., p. 20