This article refers to the involvement of the Belgian political elites to turn Brussels into the

single headquarters of the European Parliament, today officially located in Strasbourg

whereas they meet there only once a month.

The issue on European capitals has always been tricky. Since 1950, the proposal to create
the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), Brussels had been approved by a large
majority as the European capital. Simultaneously though, the Belgian government
supported the application of Liège, which seemed less attractive for the Europeans. The
ECSC institutions were thus located in Luxembourg, except for its parliamentary Assembly
whose headquarters were based in Strasbourg where the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe had already installed a large assembly, but met there only four times a
year. It is what the British member of the European Parliament David McMillan Scott
reminds in the article.

The current premises of the European Parliament in Brussels were built from 1988
onwards. As a matter of fact, beyond the Single European Act, the treaty of recovery for the
European economic integration in 1986, the European Parliament played a major role in
the negotiation of 300 European guidelines aiming at creating a single market. In such a
context, its interactions with the European Commission and the European Union Council in
Brussels gathering the Ministers strengthened; and a Convention Center was set up in
Brussels, to shelter the European Parliament informally. In 2008, the Parliament held its
first plenary session in Brussels, versus in Strasbourg, where the ceiling of the assembly
had partially collapsed.

In 2014, the European Parliament voted for a resolution aiming at identifying its
headquarters by itself, which is now established by the European treaties. However, France
and a minority part of the members of Parliament refuse to leave Strasbourg due to the
symbol that this city stands. As David McMillan SCOTT reminds, Strasbourg shelters the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe as well as the European Court for Human
Rights, which are both bodies of the Council of Europe and not the European Union.

Since then, groups in favor of Strasbourg met frequently during the monthly sessions. They
assert that the relinquishment of Strasbourg would trigger a 600 million euro loss
(equivalent to the construction costs of the Strasbourg headquarters) which would be
difficult to resell for any another purpose. They add that the Brussels headquarters could be
easily sold for over than 600 million to the European Commission which would need them.

On the other hand, the Brussels defenders try to get well organized by stating that both the
annual financial (180 million euros) and environmental (19.000 tons of CO2) cost is
outrageous.

In Brussels, the involvement is slow to set up because the leaders of the campaign in favor
of single headquarters based in Brussels have few contacts with the local politicians.
This headquarters battle shows that the territorial dimensions of the European integration
are not limited to a matter of borders and outskirts, but also to the creation of a strong
center which would be both symbolic and easy to access.