The recent policy paper by the VVSG on a future ICT support structure for local governments reads like a strategic manifesto that arrives at least ten years too late. The analysis is largely correct. So is the conclusion. Local governments are gradually losing control over their digital services. Data and processes are locked inside private software platforms. Dependency on vendors has become structural. Cybersecurity risks continue to increase. European regulation is becoming more complex. And individual municipalities simply lack the scale to tackle these challenges on their own.
Yet one question remains unanswered: Where was the VVSG when the single most strategic ICT asset of Flemish local governments — Cipal Schaubroeck — moved into foreign ownership?
That is precisely where the contradiction in this policy paper becomes visible. For years, stakeholders looked the other way while a crucial digital pillar for Flemish local governments slowly evolved from an intermunicipal ecosystem into a commercial structure that was ultimately sold to a foreign group. No alarm signals. No mobilisation. No strategic debate on digital sovereignty. No attempt to bring local governments, public shareholders and Flemish technology players together around the table.
On the contrary.Today, the same VVSG suddenly argues that “digital foundations must remain under public governance” and that data and processes should not be locked into private software environments.
But that is exactly what has been happening for years.And everyone knew it.
The policy paper even uses the analogy of utility infrastructure and energy grids to argue that critical infrastructure should remain under public control. Yet precisely at the moment when the digital infrastructure of local governments was being transferred away from public influence, the silence was deafening.
This is no longer merely a strategic mistake. It reflects a broader failure of governance and long-term vision.
What makes this even more remarkable is that the VVSG now advocates “consolidation” and explicitly refers to CIPAL dv and CEVI as essential partners. Yet at the very moment when consolidation was necessary to create a strong Flemish digital ecosystem, the most important strategic player disappeared from public governance.
Today, efforts are being made to solve a problem that should have been addressed years ago.
Meanwhile, the discussion remains heavily focused on governance models, scenarios, consultations and organisational structures. But local governments no longer need another study round.
They need action. Now.
The real question is no longer whether Flanders needs collective digital governance for local governments. Of course it does.
The real question is why this awareness only emerges after the strategic assets have already been sold.
The reality is uncomfortable but straightforward:
• Flanders has never developed a coherent industrial digital strategy for local governments.
• Intermunicipal structures evolved without a clear long-term public digital vision.
• Vendors gradually gained increasing control over data, processes and standards.
• And public decision-makers underestimated the geopolitical and economic consequences of digital dependency.
While Europe increasingly speaks about digital sovereignty, cloud sovereignty and strategic autonomy, Flanders allowed its most important local government software champion to disappear into international consolidation.
And only now does the debate on public digital governance truly begin.
The VVSG paper nevertheless contains one crucial insight: digital foundations must be organised collectively. On that point, the analysis is absolutely correct. But this requires more than theoretical reflection. It requires leadership.
Not new institutional debates. Not endless governance discussions. Not parallel structures. Not administrative caution.
What is needed is an immediate alignment of public and Flemish private forces around an open digital ecosystem for local governments.
Not closed.
Not monopolistic.
Not externally controlled.
But open, interoperable and governed in the public interest.
Initiatives focused on integration and shared digital foundations are therefore no longer optional innovation projects. They have become a strategic necessity — not as yet another silo, but as open ecosystems in which local governments, Flemish technology companies, knowledge institutions and governments jointly manage digital foundations.
The irony is complete:
The VVSG is finally writing down today what visionary voices have been arguing for years.The only problem is that this realisation came after Flanders had already sold its digital crown jewel.
Name and address known to the redaction
