Belgium combines a federal State, three Regions and three Communities, the product of six successive reforms. The institutional debate follows a Flanders-Wallonia divide: in the north, parties demand more autonomy, from confederalism to Flemish independence; in the south and on the left, parties defend the federal level, even refederalising powers such as healthcare. Two poles thus frame the axis: maintaining the federal State versus confederalism.
In short
"Keep federal" poleKeep federal
"Confederalism" poleConfederalism
UpdatedJun 22, 2026
Where the parties stand on Institutions
Keep federalConfederalism
#Party & stancePositionPole
1N-VAN-VANLThe N-VA makes confederalism its flagship project: Flanders and Wallonia would hold all powers and jointly manage only what they choose.85+
2VBVlaams BelangNL⚑ Radical stanceVlaams Belang aims for Flemish independence through a step-by-step plan leading to a sovereignty declaration, rather than a new state reform.98+
3CD&VCD&VNLCD&V advocates a state reform transferring to Flanders homogeneous packages in labour market and healthcare, with greater fiscal autonomy.55~
4VRTVooruitNLVooruit only considers a state reform if it improves governance, and sees possibilities to strengthen both the federal and the Flemish levels.42−
5MRMRFRThe MR is not seeking a state reform but supports refederalising health prevention and strengthening cooperation between levels of power.38−
6VLDOpen VLDNLOpen VLD is not seeking a state reform; should one occur, it prefers strengthening the federal level, able to decide when federated entities are deadlocked.32−
7LELes EngagésFRLes Engagés propose refederalising healthcare, with a single minister for all of Belgium, while not ruling out a negotiated state reform.30−
8ECOEcoloFREcolo wants a four-Region Belgium, refederalises healthcare, climate and mobility, and supports a federal electoral constituency.22−
9PSPSFRThe PS supports in the long term a four-Region federalism and considers a new state reform neither necessary nor desirable in the short term, without reopening institutional matters.18−
10PTBPTB·PVDAFR·NL⚑ Radical stanceThe PTB, a unitary bilingual party, defends Belgium's unity and proposes refederalising powers, considering institutional fragmentation inefficient and costly.5−
+Closer to: Confederalism (≥ 60)~Mixed / centrist stance (45–59)−Closer to: Keep federal (< 45)⚑Radical stance
⚑For neutrality, parties with radical positions (PTB·PVDA on the left, Vlaams Belang on the right) are never ranked first, even when their stance is the most pronounced on the axis: they are placed just below the first party of government. The rule applies identically on the left and on the right.
Frequently asked questions
How do you read this Institutions ranking?−
This is a POSITIONS view, not a "best party" verdict. Each party is placed on a 0–100 axis between two poles — "Keep federal" (low) and "Confederalism" (high) — based on its official 2024 manifesto, parliamentary votes, the Chapel Hill Expert Survey and Belgian media. A higher score simply means a position closer to the "Confederalism" pole, not a better or worse stance.