top of page

The fight against poverty and social issues


It seems so simple: everyone should be able to make a living from their work. Unfortunately, this is no longer obvious.

Numerous factors are responsible for this.

Housing has become much more expensive. Anyone who does not have the possibility of inheriting a property is in a bad position today.

Here too, there are several reasons: yes, Luxembourg has developed enormously, there is a greater number of inhabitants with an ever-decreasing supply of housing which leads, ipso facto, to driving up prices. But apart from this factor, various governments have not pursued a convincing housing policy for more than 30 years.

Other factors are also present: since the introduction of the euro, prices have exploded. Today, after the various crises, there are the difficulties of the supply chain. How many products are twice as expensive today as they were a few years ago?

Instead of countering this, this government has fuelled the surge in prices: introduction of a CO2 tax, sanctions against Russia, even higher VAT on rental properties, new taxes...

We demand that state quotas (the share of state taxes in energy prices) be considerably reduced: energy poverty must not continue. The same goes for utopian standards in the field of heating, building standards, etc.

Some very concrete measures also include our parental allowance, our tax reform (with of course a complete indexation of the table), the increase in family allowances, etc.

But it is also clear: if we want to continue financing high “social transfers” through the state budget, then we need GROWTH. Sustainable, healthy, targeted, yes: but without growth, the alternative means impoverishment!




To suggest to people that we can maintain our social level without growth is deceitful.

“Acting socially” means that the state must also accept and promote solutions outside the state system; whether it is home childcare, home schooling, elderly people staying at home even when in need of care, private health facilities, etc.

After all, social life should be further promoted: from the post office which remains in the village, the local grocery store which benefits from a simplified accounting system and VAT system, the village bistro, the services (hairdresser, doctor, etc.)

All this means that people are coming together again, living in society instead of living side by side in shared dormitories.

Empathy and understanding must also prevail in structures for the elderly: is it normal that elderly people who move into such a house have to abandon their pet, with whom they have lived together for many years? Who would not have their heart broken by that?




Compassionate coexistence also means that people, regardless of their disability, can participate as much as possible in daily life. Moving around without barriers is the simplest measure, but also the most important. Try getting around in a wheelchair once in any city...

We expressly oppose an “unconditional basic income” which simply cannot be funded, with laziness being rewarded instead of performance and which ultimately does not lead to general prosperity but risks causing a general impoverishment. Of course, someone who can no longer work has a right to our solidarity.

A word about our pension system, to which we have all contributed so much: it also cannot be saved if we close ourselves off to healthy but targeted growth.

The alternatives would be an increase in the length of working life, an increase in contributions and/or a reduction in performance...

bottom of page