Should Brussels replace Includo’s social outreach teams on the metro?

Brussels

Place

Brussels

City and region whose metro network and social-service system are affected by the dispute.

Why it matters

City and region whose metro network and social-service system are affected by the dispute.

About

The City of Brussels is the largest municipality and historical centre of the Brussels-Capital Region, as well as the capital of the French Community of Belgium, the Flemish Region, and Belgium. The City of Brussels is also the administrative centre of the European Union, as it hosts a number of principal EU institutions in its European Quarter.

Official site ↗View source record ↗

Bennani argues that running social patrols is not the core purpose of Brussels’ public-transport operator. She put Includo’s resources at €6 million and said established associations possess greater expertise in homelessness and addiction. Citing reports from Yser, Aumale and Saint-Guidon stations, she described encounters with people using drugs or sleeping rough as possible at any hour and said the situation contributes to passengers’ sense of insecurity. Her proposal has not yet produced a confirmed budget transfer or government decision.

Van den Brandt defended a different division of labour. She told Belgian media that a purely security-led approach merely displaces people to another station or into surrounding streets. Because the STIB is present throughout its own network for most of the day, she argued, its teams can establish contact where distress is actually visible. Her framing is that Includo connects people to specialist services rather than replacing those organisations.

The STIB’s own figures provide some evidence for that account, although they are operational results rather than an independent evaluation. In a December 2025 statement, the operator said Includo had made about 5,700 outreach visits and intensively followed roughly 300 people during its first year. Its 23 outreach workers and three managers operated between 6am and 2am, using two buses and an adapted van. The service began on 1 November 2024 and was modelled partly on the RATP’s long-running social-outreach operation in the Paris metro.

That record does not settle Bennani’s central question: whether the same money would achieve more if entrusted directly to established social organisations. No publicly cited comparative assessment demonstrates whether the STIB model produces better housing, treatment or safety outcomes than an association-led alternative. Nor do the published totals show how many contacts led to stable accommodation, sustained healthcare or recovery support. The distinction matters because outreach can create trust, but it cannot manufacture shelter places, affordable housing or treatment capacity.

Brussels’ wider homelessness figures explain why the metro has become a pressure point rather than the source of the crisis. Bruss’Help counted 9,777 people without a home in the Brussels-Capital Region on the night of 6 to 7 November 2024, 24.5% more than in 2022 under a comparable methodology. Nearly 1,000 were living in public space. Stations offer shelter, visibility and passing services, but the STIB has itself stressed that transport infrastructure is not dignified accommodation.

The two political positions therefore overlap more than their clash suggests. Bennani and Van den Brandt both say people in distress should not be left in stations; they disagree over which institution should make first contact and control the resources. Specialist associations emphasise pathways into care and housing, while the operator must also keep trains and stations accessible and safe for passengers. Treating homelessness and drug dependency as interchangeable would further obscure the different interventions each may require.

Internationally, Includo reflects a broader European shift away from relying exclusively on police or security staff in transport systems. The Paris comparison supports keeping trained outreach close to the network, but it does not automatically prove that the Brussels design or budget is optimal. Brussels is also the seat of major EU institutions, yet this remains a city and regional-policy dispute rather than an EU competence: the relevant decision-makers are the Brussels government, parliament, STIB and regional social-service network.

The next meaningful step would be publication of an independent outcome-based evaluation comparing cost, referrals and durable exits from the metro with credible alternatives. Until then, Bennani’s proposal remains a political demand and Includo continues operating. The unanswered question is not simply who should patrol the stations, but whether Brussels can provide somewhere safe for outreach teams to send the people they meet.