Olaf Scholz a climate chancellor? "No."

Enlarge image

Olaf Scholz 2022 at the world climate conference in Egypt

Photo: Michael Kappeler / picture alliance / dpa

SPIEGEL:

Mr. Vollert, why did you co-found a climate network in the SPD?

Does your party need it?

Vollert:

Yes, because many of the ideas of the climate movement had not really arrived in the SPD.

That's why we wanted to build a bridge between the movement and the party.

We have been bringing climate demands to the SPD for two years now, so that we can hopefully translate them into concrete politics there.

MIRROR:

How does that work?

Vollert:

One example is our work on so-called divestment.

There are funds from which pensions for civil servants will be financed in the future.

However, a large part of this money is not invested in a climate-neutral way.

That's over 500 million euros that could be invested in climate-friendly companies instead.

To change that, we held several talks with members of parliament and met with Johann Saathoff, an SPD state secretary in the Ministry of the Interior.

The willingness to talk shows us that initial resistance can be overcome.

SPIEGEL:

The SPD made climate protection a key issue in the 2021 federal election campaign.

How can it be that these problems still go under?

Vollert:

The 1.5-degree target hasn't really reached the center of the SPD to this day.

Most members would be committed to the goal and honestly mean it.

But there is no idea of ​​what steps are then required to reach 1.5 degrees.

There is a vacuum in the SPD.

The topic of climate protection is not structurally anchored in the party.

MIRROR:

What do you mean by that?

Vollert:

At federal party level, for example, there is no working group on the subject of climate.

SPIEGEL:

Why not?

Vollert:

Because there is no money.

Working groups are expensive.

And many of the groups that exist in the SPD today date back to the days of Gerhard Schröder.

It's not that easy to introduce new topics.

That's why the work of our network is also received very positively: We help to fill a gap.

SPIEGEL:

Before Lützerath was evicted, you and your network launched a campaign to preserve the hamlet and took part in local demonstrations.

Otherwise, hardly anyone from the SPD has commented on the subject.

Would you have hoped for more?

Vollert:

Absolutely.

From our point of view, it is a wrong step to mine the coal under Lützerath.

Several studies show that the coal is not needed at all.

It would have been good if more people from the SPD had publicly mentioned this problem - especially from the SPD in North Rhine-Westphalia.

There we sit in opposition.

So it would have been easy there to position yourself against the actions of the state government.

After all, 70 other SPD and Juso structures have joined our call.

SPIEGEL:

For a long time, the SPD was seen as a coal party.

What role does that still play in such debates today?

Vollert:

When I joined the SPD in 2017, the tenor was: What the Greens are doing with climate protection is quite nice, but so and so many jobs depend on the coal industry.

The realization that these jobs cannot last in the long term has only prevailed in the SPD in recent years.

The party is going through a big change.

SPIEGEL:

Before the general election, Olaf Scholz campaigned with the term climate chancellor.

Vollert:

Do you know who coined the term climate chancellor?

MIRROR:

No.

Vollert:

That was us.

At that time we published a text in the SPD newspaper "Vorwärts" why Scholz had to become a climate chancellor.

After that it was increasingly taken up.

SPIEGEL:

And has Olaf Scholz become a climate chancellor?

Fuller:

No.

Under normal circumstances, I would say: the first record is catastrophic.

Scholz wanted to bring climate protection into office and so far there is hardly anything to see.

But of course, with a view to the war in Ukraine, one also has to admit that the chancellor and the federal government had to face many other problems.

SPIEGEL:

A climate chancellor would probably push the issue even further in times of crisis.

Vollert:

We would of course be very happy if Olaf Scholz would make more progress in this area.

And of course it would also be nice if he didn't behave as awkwardly towards climate activists as he did in the past.

But as I said, we are aware that the Chancellery is busy with other things.

That is why we are trying to promote climate protection in the parliamentary group as well.

SPIEGEL:

In the past few weeks, there have been heated discussions in the traffic light coalition about expanding freeways.

Green faction leader Katharina Dröge accused the SPD of behaving like a "spectator on the sidelines".

Can you understand that?

Vollert:

Yes, I can.

The fact that FDP MPs still prefer to build autobahns instead of introducing speed limits strikes me as totally odd.

SPD MPs or members of the government should position themselves more clearly.

Perhaps there has been a lack of alternative concepts that can be jointly advocated.

We want to change that.

SPIEGEL:

Does the SPD simply have no ideas of its own when it comes to climate protection?

Vollert:

No, not at all.

The SPD has many good ideas for individual sectors.

But we lack an overall concept for climate protection.

Take traffic as an example: During the 2021 election campaign, Olaf Scholz announced that there should be around 15 million electric cars on German roads by 2030.

But there are actually a lot more numbers to this promise: How many cars should then still be on the roads in total?

How many trucks?

And how much passenger and goods traffic should be shifted to trains?

We have to think things through to the end.

SPIEGEL:

What do you think should be included in such an overall concept?

Vollert:

On the one hand, concrete ideas are needed as to how we can shape a socially just climate policy.

Climate money, for example, is a measure that could be used to offset effective CO2 pricing for low-income households.

That was already in the coalition agreement, but has so far fallen under the table.

On the other hand, the SPD must dare to draw red lines.

The fact that the federal government now wants to support the development of new gas fields, for example, is an absolute catastrophe.

SPIEGEL:

You mean the natural gas projects off the coast of Senegal and Mauritania, in which Germany might want to participate.

Fuller:

Exactly.

When it comes to projects like this, you bang your hands over your head and think: Olaf, what are you doing?

We need to get out of fossil fuels, not in.

A limit has already been crossed for us.

SPIEGEL:

How frustrating is that for you as a young party member?

Vollert:

At first it causes frustration, but it doesn't last long.

We do not lose heart in this work just because we see that there is still a lot to be done.

Our concern is to anchor the 1.5-degree target in all 400,000 heads of the SPD in such a way that they always think about climate protection.

This takes a while.

But I think we're on the right track.

SPIEGEL:

Why don't you just go to the Greens and make your climate policy there?

Vollert:

Because the climate crisis is a social crisis.

It not only destroys the environment, but people's livelihoods.

However, this primarily affects the less privileged.

Therefore, the fight against the climate crisis must be a core concern of social democracy.

This is a question of social justice.

That is why we not only demand climate protection, but climate justice.

SPIEGEL:

What do you think of the protests like the "Last Generation" that are sticking to the streets?

Vollert:

Ultimately, these activists are primarily afraid of the climate crisis, I can empathize with that.

And objectively they are right when they denounce that we are currently missing all climate targets.

Personally, however, I think our work is more effective in the long run because we are directly addressing political levers, namely the governing party.

SPIEGEL:

So climate activism on the street is useless?

Vollert:

On the contrary.

I have the feeling that the climate movement sometimes underestimates itself.

Many activists say their work has not worked.

That's not true.

Just how much we talk about climate protection today shows that things are slowly changing.

Without the pressure from the street, that would probably never have happened.