Because, in particular, it is a liberal minister (Willy Borsus) who personifies the recent decision of the Walloon government to launch the procedure for modifying the sector plan within the framework of the very high voltage electricity line project between Avelgem and Courcelles, the Revolht collective had mobilized citizens, this Sunday morning in Ath (Ath). The president of the MR, Georges-Louis Bouchez, was expected there for a morning of work with the local representatives of the region. The program had to be adapted because of the “welcome committee” to which Mr. Bouchez did not shirk, talking for more than an hour with local residents potentially impacted by the Bouclez du Hainaut and its significant consequences on various levels.
“I was well aware that people from Revolht were going to be present” explains Mr. Bouchez at the end of this improvised debate. “And so the goal was to be able to answer questions and also to be able to show the next steps to get across the idea that the message is understood, the message is heard, and we will do everything that is technically feasible, whatever the price. So that, it must be very clear: we need this electricity, but with the least possible nuisance. Everything must be done so that there is the least possible nuisance for local residents, here or elsewhere, whatever route is chosen.”
“You have to be respectful”
“I really wanted to take the time to talk with everyone” insists the president of the MR. “It is fundamental for these people; it is often their life that is at stake. A house is often the only heritage we have or in any case a major element. a question of money, there is also an emotional element, there are health elements that are essential and so that’s why you have to be extremely respectful, take the time to answer questions and not come to confront certainties, but on the contrary to ensure that the project progresses in the best direction.”
“So what is planned is that in any case, on my side, at MR level, we have invited both members of Revolht, both engineers and representatives of Elia; Revolht will decide whether they want to come to this stage or not. But whatever happens, what I want is to confront the technical arguments because for the moment, on the one hand, we hear Elia, on the other other side, we hear Revolht and it goes back and forth, a bit like a magic bullet. At some point, the same arguments have to be confronted in the same room so that we can then find the best path and the best situation. But we have to stop the pretense; we have to put the file on the table; a bit like on nuclear power, we have to have an approach that is scientific and rational in relation to the subject and that takes into account the legitimate expectations of the citizens.”
“The problem with a buried line is that it cannot be connected to another line; however, we need it in the event of load shedding or to pass electricity through other networks” notes Georges-Louis Bouchez. “So I want this argument to also be confronted so that in the end we are sure to make the best choice. But if total burial is possible, well indeed, even if it is more expensive, we’re going to have to do it. Because on an investment of such a duration, you have to give priority in particular to health and well-being. Personally, I don’t want to talk nonsense and say no line; but you have to have a line that precisely does not impact citizens.”
“Burial must be the first choice”
“Beyond the financial aspect, there is obviously the human aspect, the emotional aspect, the public health aspect, and therefore we cannot take a decision lightly. That’s why I want us to take the time we need to compare the technical and scientific arguments. And we really have to have burial as the first choice; and it would really take something that is insurmountable to justify not doing the But it’s clear that direction and orientation must be buried. Technologically, we know how to do a lot of things. Personally, I believe a lot in technical and technological progress; therefore, it’s up to the engineers to work to achieve this solution.”
“We also give the promise to keep in touch; it’s not to come today and then to maintain silence and then another day a decision. What I would like is that we have an orientation as precise as possible before the elections. Because everyone goes a little bit with their little phrase, their little promise, I think that technical certainties are needed and, moreover, to precisely maintain contact in order to move forward in the file in respect with all citizens.”
“What was decided by the government? Only one thing is that we needed this line, but for the rest, everything is possible.”
A file and many citizens in pain
On the side of the Revolht collective, satisfaction is rather in order, compared to the dialogue. “For two years now, three or four people have been going to see political representatives in an often very structured way and with tied up files” emphasizes Marie Reman. “But we didn’t want politicians to forget that there are all these people behind, these citizens who are suffering and who must be listened to and heard. That’s what’s important, with these life projects that are on the ground .”
“I am satisfied with this meeting, that Mr. Bouchez was able to realize what people think, that people are still following the file just as much as at the beginning”.