The King’s decision came after a weekend of attempts by the King, and later for a short time by his appointed negotiator, vice prime minister Didier Reynders, to fathom out where the various parties stood. The final decision last Monday makes it clear there was no room for agreement. The voter will almost certainly now decide.

Last week, the leader of the Open VLD Flemish liberals, Alexander De Croo, surprised everyone by walking out of the government coalition over the future of electoral constituency Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde, after talks the previous evening had failed to reach an accord. Prime minister Yves Leterme’s response was to go to the palace to offer the resignation of his government. The king took Leterme’s resignation into consideration and called in the speakers of the chamber and the senate for talks.

Meanwhile, there was chaos in the chamber. At a press conference announcing his party’s withdrawal from the government, De Croo (pictured) made clear his intent to put a motion for the immediate splitting of Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde on the agenda that very day, forcing the issue to a vote. That never happened, as chamber speaker Patrick Dewael cancelled the day’s plenary session altogether. Instead, the party leaders in the chamber made an appointment to discuss the question at their regular agenda meeting on Monday.

The issue of Brussels-Halle Vilvoorde, or BHV, is enormously complex and reaches down into the roots of the Belgian state. Halle-Vilvoorde is in Flemish Brabant, the only province that is divided into two constituencies. Brussels a region in itself, like Flanders and Wallonia. But Halle-Vilvoorde is, for the purposes of the courts and elections, tied to Brussels, giving rise to virtually a split personality.

Following a reorganisation of the system in 2002, BHV is the only constituency that does not conform to provincial boundaries, and the only one that straddles a regional divide, as well as a language divide (Brussels is bilingual, while Halle-Vilvoorde is Dutch speaking).

BHV is also the only constituency where both Dutch-speaking and French-speaking parties take part in elections, and there lies the big problem. Halle-Vilvoorde is a Flemish area where French-speaking parties operate. At the same time, the municipalities around the edge of Brussels, all of which lie within Halle- Vilvoorde, are steadily becoming more French speaking, as families move out of Brussels. That verfransing, or Frenchification, is at the root of the so-called facilities, which allow residents of Kraainem, Wezembeek-Oppem and Linkebeek, for example, to deal with the municipal authorities in French, although the administrations are officially Flemish.

The three mayors
This language mix also lies at the heart of the ongoing problem of the three mayors of those same municipalities, who, despite being the leaders of the winning lists, cannot take up their functions. This is because the Flemish government will not officially appoint them since they broke the language laws by sending out official electoral papers in French. Their parties refuse to nominate replacements, and the situation is at a stalemate.

If BHV were to be split, Brusselsbased French-speaking parties could no longer attract votes in Halle-Vilvoorde, where they enjoy a growing electorate. On the other hand, while Flemish parties would still operate in Brussels, they would have a much smaller number of voters than at present, where the capital is part of BHV. Flemish parties together attract only about 15% of all votes in Brussels.

French speakers also fear the consequences of a split should Flanders ever decide to declare independence. The language border would then become a national border (the argument goes) and, since Brussels is entirely encased within Flemish Brabant, it would therefore become part of an independent Flanders.

Current situation unconstitutional
Some kind of solution is essential because the Constitutional Court has ruled that the current situation is unconstitutional. A 2007 deadline was avoided by the sort of legalistic trickery that often characterises Belgian politics; today there is simply no further avenue for escape.

The issue now is under what terms the agreement will be reached. The Flemish parties could try to steamroller a split through parliament, but their French-speaking counterparts would then issue a set of challenges that would delay a result for years. They would also take such a move as a declaration of war, which could destroy any hope of more far-reaching state reforms for at least a generation.

The trouble with a negotiated agreement, on the other hand, is not to give too much away – and the French-speaking side has a lengthy wish-list of concessions. Those range from attaching the facility municipalities to Brussels permanently, the creation of a “corridor” linking Brussels to Walloon-Brabant in the event of a declaration of independence or a “right to registration”, which would allow French-speaking residents of Halle-Vilvoorde to vote for French-speaking candidates in Brussels after a split.

It now appears an election is the only way of cutting through the Gordian knot of BHV. Although it is ironic that the coming election, whenever it might take place, will be unconstitutional as a result of the failure of the BHV issue to be solved.

In the meantime, Belgium faces another crisis: on July 1, the country takes over the presidency of the EU, meaning that the next two months of preparation, and perhaps even longer, will be overshadowed by the lack of a government. Last week former prime minister Wilfried Martens, now a member of the European Parliament, predicted that very problem. “What kind of image do we present to Europe if we have to preside the Union without a government?” he asked.