The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Traffic light coalition negotiations: The SPD, FDP and the Greens are arguing about this

2021-10-22T10:48:19.950Z


Climate, traffic, care, foreign policy: The exploratory paper by the Greens, SPD and FDP has many gaps - and the financing is unclear in all areas. The blind spots start with the social. The overview.


It was football that broke the ice.

And it happened right at the beginning of the traffic light talks between Social Democrats, Greens and Liberals.

They were looking for a human level that would facilitate the start of the difficult negotiations.

SPD general secretary Lars Klingbeil and FDP leader Christian Lindner started talking about the most beautiful minor matter in the world.

The Bayern fan Klingbeil and the Borussia fan Lindner talked shop about the Bundesliga and agreed to meet.

If things went well here, the two promised each other, they would go to the stadium together.

On December 4th, when Bayern play against Borussia.

As of today, it should be a top game, the first in the table against the second in the table.

If the coalition agreement is actually negotiated by the end of November, as the traffic light partners announced on Thursday, Klingbeil and Lindner may already be sitting in the stands as federal ministers-designate, one for defense, the other for finance.

In any case, the speed of the soundings was impressive.

Within a week, the three traffic light parties had reached more agreements than the Jamaica explorers in a whole month in 2017.

Many conflicts were not covered up with nice words, but decided in favor of one or the other position.

The liberals in particular were able to assert themselves on important issues.

The SPD and the Greens had to forego left-wing projects such as tax increases and citizens' insurance, agree to an entry into the share pension, and also bury the plans for a general speed limit.

In return, the Greens secured efforts to phase out coal earlier and put an end to the fossil combustion engine, while the SPD pushed through its central election campaign issue: the minimum wage of 12 euros.

Win-win for everyone, that was the first impression.

But at second glance it becomes clear that most of the work still lies ahead of the would-be coalitionists.

If you take a closer look at the agreement, you will see numerous conflicts.

And contrary to the assurances that everything was on the table in the explorations, some topics do not appear at all in the twelve-page paper.

Either because there was simply no more time.

Or because the impending conflicts were piled up so high that they preferred to circumnavigate them.

And so some gaps were concealed with empty formula compromises.

The previous agreements resemble a framework in which many struts are still missing, supporting as well as securing.

It now depends on the care of the scaffolders whether something stable is created.

There are large gaps in social policy, in the agricultural and transport sectors and in foreign policy, one of the weakest chapters in the paper.

But the agreement also remains pale on the human issue of climate protection: no regulation on the CO₂ price, one of the most important control elements of the ecological turnaround.

It is questionable whether the Social Democrats, Greens and the Free Democrats will actually bring the German citizens the "largest modernization project since the 1970s" (FDP man Marco Buschmann) by Christmas or only scattered approaches.

It depends on the will to cross ideological rifts, but above all on the negotiators' arithmetic skills.

The question of financing hovers over the traffic light alliance like a dark storm cloud. By deciding not to raise taxes and to return to the debt brake, the explorers have severely restricted their room for maneuver. If the coalition negotiations are to be successful, those who scramble for the office of finance minister have to be particularly creative: FDP leader Lindner and Greens leader Robert Habeck.

The traffic light men and women received a foretaste of the difficulties to be expected on the last night of explorations.

The clock showed well after midnight, only the smallest circle, that is, party chairmen and general secretaries, were still sitting together.

Coalition talks run like Middle Eastern peace negotiations: nothing is decided until everything is decided.

And when it comes to climate protection, who is surprised, very few decisions had yet been made.

The Greens are convinced: The Paris climate protection target cannot be met if the coal-fired power plants do not go offline well before 2038, preferably this decade.

They cannot support a coalition that does not agree on this.

The breakthrough came early in the morning.

Liberals and Social Democrats promised the Greens what they had insisted on: the coal phase-out should "ideally" be carried out by 2030, said the neglected negotiators.

The new coalition will conduct an examination.

That sounds pretty vague, but an important knot was knocked through for the Greens at that moment.

Just in time for the press conference at which the negotiators celebrated their engagement.

However, the dispute over the issue of climate protection is far from being resolved.

Traffic - not a word about bicycles

The section on traffic in the exploratory paper is almost entirely about cars. Not a word about bicycle traffic and just a meager line about local public transport. "In the context of climate-friendly mobility, we will support the development of intelligent system solutions for individual transport and public transport." Is this perhaps about digitization or what the Greens call "MobilPass" - an app for all means of transport? Unfortunately unclear.

There is agreement on the political truism that the railway needs to be expanded. Just how much money will the federal government provide for this? In which form? Will the railway be smashed into a company for the amusement ride and an infrastructure company? How can tickets be cheaper? And if the train should make domestic flights superfluous - by when should this work and how? Even the fundamental questions remain unanswered.

The focus of the passage on traffic is the car because it has always been the focus of transport policy in Germany, but also because, from the perspective of the Greens, it is a decisive lever to change something. A general speed limit: excluded. In return, the FDP agreed with an exit date from the new registration of fossil burners before the year 2035 on something that it does not like at all. The German car manufacturers have long been pushing for clarity. The commitment to e-mobility that they are calling for is reflected in the exploratory results.

The FDP has negotiated a commitment to e-fuels. In other words, fuels that are burned in internal combustion engines but are produced synthetically with renewable energies and for the production of which carbon is taken from the air or biomass. It is said that »verifiably only vehicles that can be refueled with e-fuels« can be re-registered for longer than conventional combustion engines. Experts only say: So far, there are no such cars that can only be proven to be able to fill up with e-fuels. So it's pure symbolism, nothing more. A lot of joy with it says from the Greens.

The climate is also about budgetary issues.

So far, company cars and diesel vehicles, for example, have had tax advantages.

Such climate-damaging subsidies should be put to the test.

But FDP boss Lindner publicly ruled out the abolition of the diesel privilege on ARD: "These are subsidies that, if they were to be removed, would have the character of a tax increase for the broader middle of society."

Agriculture - ideological conflicts

In agricultural policy, the lines of conflict are ideologically similar. The Greens want to create a system in which farmers are adequately paid for ecological services, but believe that such a system cannot arise without rules and prohibitions. The FDP wants a system in which farmers are adequately paid for their work, but believes that such a system can only come about with fewer rules and prohibitions.

For almost a year, the »Agriculture Future Commission«, a committee made up of interest representatives, worked out proposals for this. "Now, however, it is the turn of politicians to realign the agri-environmental policy for the next few years on the basis of our recommendations with a little implementation imagination," says Peter Strohschneider, the head of the commission. In the summer, the 31-member group presented a final report. It has 154 pages and is supported by a broad alliance, from the farmers' association, nature conservation ring, BUND to the food trade.

There is a lot at stake: Agriculture and land use are responsible for around a tenth of greenhouse gas emissions.

A large part of the country is usable land; water quality, air quality and biodiversity depend on the type of use, but also the type of animal husbandry and thus ethical issues, food supply, jobs and the future of rural areas.

So far, however, there has only been an ambiguous paragraph in the exploratory paper on all of this.

It is said that agriculture is being supported »to embark on a sustainable, environmentally and nature-friendly path«.

“At the same time, the aim is to secure an adequate income for the farmers in the long term.” Who could not subscribe to that?

The negotiators are silent about the "how".

Even comparatively clear passages offer space for discussion. "We want to limit the use of pesticides to what is necessary," they say. But what is necessary? Greens otherwise like to orientate themselves towards strict European targets for pesticide reduction, so the »necessary measure« is very vague in comparison, in this respect the sentence is more in line with the FDP. In the following sentence, however, it says: "Plants should be protected in such a way that side effects for the environment, health and biodiversity are avoided." A compromise is not yet in sight.

"The toughest conflicts are to be expected in the agricultural and environmental sectors," says Green MEP and negotiator Martin Häusling.

"Reducing pesticides, genetic engineering, animal welfare, we're miles apart."

Care - large blank space

The traffic light partners promise a »socio-ecological market economy«, but social questions in particular are still waiting to be answered.

In the care of the elderly in particular, the prospective coalitionists are affording a large vacancy.

Not a word about the situation of caring relatives.

No statement on the higher performance that the government has been promising for years.

Not a single sentence on the skyrocketing home costs.

Instead, the explorers promise "an offensive for more nursing staff".

Social experts are horrified.

A comprehensive care reform is not even mentioned, criticizes Verena Bentele, president of the social association VdK.

"It is astonishing that the exploratory paper on the most pressing nursing and health issues does not focus on the future, but on the future."

It is also clear to the traffic light parties that they will soon have to fill the gaps.

“There is nothing about it in the exploratory paper.

We have to deal with that now.

We will have a lot to do in health and care over the next four years, ”says health expert Karl Lauterbach, who is part of the SPD team for the coalition negotiations.

"Much was left behind during the pandemic."

Ricarda Lang, Vice Vice President of the Greens, says: "In the care of the elderly, some points have remained open for the coalition negotiations."

"We advocate a care period plus." Employees should be able to take time off for up to three months if they are caring for a relative or confidante.

The discussions will also have to deal with the increased home costs.

Statistics show that every home resident currently has to pay an average of 2125 euros out of pocket for his place - per month.

Shortly before the summer break, the federal government introduced a law to limit the burdens on senior citizens.

However, the effect will be manageable.

However, financially, the social security funds are facing difficult times.

The long-term care insurance had to be fed with a tax subsidy for the first time in its history last year, and at the beginning of October the federal government stepped in again with a billion.

The situation in statutory health insurance is even more desolate.

According to a new ordinance by Health Minister Spahn, the federal government will have to inject an additional 14 billion euros in the next year in order to keep the contribution rates stable - this adds up to the 14.5 billion that are already set on a rotating basis.

At the beginning of November, the cabinet should decide on the increased financial injection.

The exploratory paper is silent on how the systems can be made future-proof in the long term.

The negotiators could not come to an agreement.

The Greens and the SPD had proposed to bring more high earners and civil servants into the statutory coffers in the long run.

That couldn't be done with the FDP.

The parties expect "tough negotiations" about the financing of health and care.

Citizens' insurance seems to be excluded.

If the own shares are not to increase further, tax subsidies or contribution increases will be inevitable.

Housing - dispute over rent freeze

Even with housing, the number one concern for many citizens, the answers given by the traffic light partners so far are anything but satisfactory.

They promise the construction of new apartments, but for tenants who are looking for a new apartment in the near future, the paper offers only one sentence: The current tenant protection regulations want to "evaluate and extend" the future coalition partners.

"Tenants are not helped either by the romance of traffic lights or the promise to evaluate and extend the current tenant protection regulations," says the President of the German Tenants' Association, Lukas Siebenkotten.

He calls for a six-year rental freeze.

"We expect the so-called progress coalition to tackle this problem with oomph," says Siebenkotten.

The Green Youth spokesman Timon Dzienus is also calling for a »rent moratorium«.

Not only the Greens, but also the SPD had campaigned for it.

"Where necessary, we will introduce a temporary rent freeze as a temporary solution," said the SPD future program.

However, it is still unclear where a compromise line could lie with the FDP, which clearly rejects this instrument.

The discussions on the subject should therefore not be easy, which is also due to the staff.

The SPD sends Vice-President Kevin Kühnert to the "Building and Living" group, who promoted the initiative to expropriate housing groups in Berlin, as negotiator.

Foreign policy - unclear strategy against China and Russia

Even where it is not about money, there are gaps and contradictions.

Foreign and security policy was clearly not at the fore of the negotiations.

The negotiators of the SPD, FDP and Greens reportedly showed little interest in dealing more intensively with it.

And so there are hardly any new approaches in the exploratory paper.

It is true that the traffic light partners want to set up foreign, security and development policy on a “value-based” basis, but that it is also about “systemic competition with authoritarian states and dictatorships”.

But how exactly Germany should act towards Russia and China is not described.

Greens and Liberals are for a tougher course against the two authoritarian regimes, the SPD is on the brakes.

The long-standing controversial issue of the Russian twin gas pipeline Nord Stream 2 also remains unresolved. The Greens want to prevent the Putin pipeline from going into operation, the SPD supports it, the Liberals maneuver somewhere in between. In the paper there is a reference to European energy law, for Nord Stream opponents an indication that the debate about the completed pipeline can be reopened. According to European law, Gazprom is not allowed to own and operate the pipeline at the same time, says Greens chairwoman Annalena Baerbock in an interview with SPIEGEL. "But that would currently be the case."

There are also only meager sentences on defense policy. NATO is an "indispensable part of our security," they say, and the equipment of the Bundeswehr is being improved. So does the alliance target of a defense budget of two percent of annual economic output apply? No statement. Do the SPD, FDP and the Greens commit to nuclear participation in NATO, i.e. the deterrence through nuclear weapons? Not clear.

Sometimes the paper also contains open contradictions.

On the one hand, the traffic light negotiators are in favor of "more binding rules" of a "restrictive arms export policy".

On the other hand, they propose an EU arms export regulation that is coordinated with the »European partners«.

How the trick is to succeed in enforcing tougher rules on arms exports for traditionally liberal arms exporters like France remains her secret.

The most concrete is the decision to set up a committee of inquiry into the Afghanistan withdrawal.

This was achieved by the Greens and the FDP against the resistance of the Social Democrats.

But the question of whether something should structurally change in German foreign policy was postponed.

Experts have been proposing the establishment of a National Security Council for a long time, and the FDP made this demand its own in the election campaign.

But apparently the liberals could not prevail, the paper only speaks of interdepartmental cooperation.

The Greens and Social Democrats were therefore surprised that FDP leader Christian Lindner presented the establishment of a "National Security Council" as decided on Monday.

Nils Schmid, SPD negotiator in the working group on foreign policy, says there is no pre-determination

Corona - lack of precaution

The corona crisis is hardly mentioned in the exploratory paper.

While the number of infected people is increasing and experts are warning of the fourth wave, the future coalitionists only write: “We want to make our health system strong so that it is well prepared for future crises, such as a new pandemic.

To do this, we will learn from the findings of the pandemic and digitize and strengthen the public health service. "

A concept to get out of the crisis?

How to strengthen civil protection, which was largely unable to act during the crisis?

How finally to ensure a valid database?

All of this remains approximate.

There is no other way, says SPD health politician Karl Lauterbach. "Corona is not a party-political issue." The cautious formulations of the exploratory paper are therefore wisely chosen. For example, the question of when the epidemic emergency will end shouldn't become a political plaything, says Lauterbach. "So I'm all the more surprised that the Federal Minister of Health is now calling for Freedom Day."

The corona crisis of all things could show the traffic light coalitioners a way out of the financing dilemma. Because the debt brake is suspended until next year due to the pandemic, the return to the rule set out in the exploratory paper will only apply from 2023. The new coalition could first decide on a € 200 billion transformation fund for investments in climate protection and digitization, financed by new debts. Marcel Fratzscher, head of the German Institute for Economic Research, and the former economist Lars Feld, a representative of the ordoliberal school, recently advocated this.

Is that enough? The Greens have doubts and are still flirting with higher taxes. On the one hand, the FDP advocates relief for the budget, for example through an end to subsidies for e-cars, as the rich often enough benefit from this. At the same time, Lindner's proposal for a super depreciation program can be found in the exploratory paper. The idea: Tax advantages should make investments in digitization and climate protection more attractive. There is enough money in many household budgets, says the FDP leader, and the problem is often the outflow of funds.

When the man who would like to become finance minister stepped in front of the cameras three days after the end of the explorations, the initial euphoria was no longer felt.

"We still consider it desirable that lower and middle incomes are relieved," said Lindner.

"But we have to accept that this is not initially possible in this constellation, because our interlocutors tie tax relief to increases elsewhere, which we do not consider right with a view to the necessary economic recovery in our country."

There was no longer any talk of a common narrative of new beginnings and progress.

What if there is not even a compromise solution in many key issues?

That also seems to have become clear to the FDP leader.

If the coalition negotiations were to be successfully concluded, said Lindner, it would initially be nothing more than an "alliance of convenience".

Source: spiegel

All news articles on 2021-10-22

You may like

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-03-27T16:45:54.081Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.