Enlarge image
Hesse's Prime Minister Volker Bouffier
Photo: CLEMENS BILAN / EPA
The revised Infection Protection Act passed by the Bundestag has met with criticism from the Prime Ministers.
Following the successful vote of the Bundestag, the state leaders debate the resolutions passed by parliament in a special session of the Federal Council.
Hesse's Prime Minister
Volker Bouffier
(
CDU
)
described the rigid exit restrictions at the start of the discussion as "constitutionally problematic".
In addition to legal concerns, there are also considerable practical problems with the implementation, for example with the planned school closings.
The Bundestag had "let pass the chance to absorb more and more intensively a lot of the experiences of the federal states that we have gained from a year of practical crisis management," said Bouffier.
Despite the criticism, his country will not agree to the appeal to the mediation committee.
Action must be taken to prevent the pandemic from spiraling out of control.
Because the law is a so-called objection law, the approval of the Federal Council is not required.
The state chamber could, however, stop the law by appealing to the mediation committee.
Because: "Unnecessary, but also harmless"
Lower Saxony's head of government Stephan Weil (
SPD
)
said the new regulations were "not a big hit" for infection protection.
In the case of exit restrictions, the constitutional possibility is questionable, he is "very excited" about the case law.
For Lower Saxony, the law even meant considerable opportunities for relaxation.
It is "unnecessary for my country, but I also add harmless," said Weil.
Nonetheless, the sometimes slow consultations between the federal government and the federal states in the past were "not always good for the reputation of federalism."
Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania's Prime Minister
Manuela Schwesig
(SPD), predicted a ping-pong effect in the number of infections even before the Federal Council debate.
“The design flaw in this federal law is: They close at 165, then wait five days for them to be below 165 - say 160 - and then open again.
Then I can already predict: a week later they will be over 165 again and close, «said Schwesig in the ZDF» Morgenmagazin «.
"This emergency brake falls far short of the rules that we agreed upon," says Schwesig.
It will lead to the number of infections leveling off at a high level.
Haseloff: "Development, design and result unsatisfactory"
Saxony-Anhalt's Prime Minister
Reiner Haseloff
(CDU)
called the law unsatisfactory in terms of its development, structure and result.
Now "the question arises even more clearly what the added value of this law for the people in Germany lies".
The regular coordination between the federal government and the federal states from last year has proven itself "in principle".
The legislative initiative and the debate about it had "inflicted damage that is difficult to cure" for federalism.
Berlin's Prime Minister Michael Müller (SPD) described the law as "an addition - perhaps an important addition to our own actions, one more, no more and no less than one".
The Prime Minister's Conference remains important.
The "emergency brake" should be pulled if the number of reported new infections per 100,000 inhabitants in a district or a city is over 100 within seven days for three days in a row.
Then people are usually no longer allowed to leave their own apartment after 10 p.m.
Walking and jogging alone are allowed until midnight.
A maximum of one household can meet with one other person, with the exception of children up to 14 years of age.
Shops are only allowed to open to customers who present a negative corona test and have booked an appointment.
Classroom teaching in schools should usually be stopped at an incidence of 165.
fek / dpa
