Enlarge image
Quarreling Lindner (l.), Habeck: seemingly insurmountable gap
Photo: MICHELE TANTUSSI / REUTERS
At the weekend, the federal government is retreating to Schloss Meseberg for a cabinet retreat.
Time to think, time for the big political lines - that's the way it should be.
In fact, a lot would be gained if it were possible to settle the conflicts that have recently shaped – and slowed down – the work of the traffic light.
The governing coalition is once again arguing about very fundamental issues.
The list is long and recently got longer.
In addition to permanently irritating topics such as motorways and traffic, heating and fuels are now among the topics discussed.
The gap between the smaller coalition partners, the FDP and the Greens, is often so wide that it seems insurmountable.
As is so often the case, the chancellor's party, the SPD, is holding back.
What is it about in detail?
The overview.
The heating dispute:
The Green Economics Minister Robert Habeck wants to stop the installation of new oil and gas heating systems next year (read the background to this here).
From January 1, 2024, every newly installed heating system should be operated with 65 percent renewable energy.
According to experts, this cannot be done with conventional gas and oil heating systems.
It is wrong that Habeck, as suggested by the "Bild" newspaper, decided to end gas heating on his own.
The traffic light in the coalition agreement originally agreed on 2025 as the exit date.
In the coalition committee last year, however, the coalition members had decided to bring the exit one year earlier.
However, that did not prevent the FDP from accusing Habeck of a "scrapping orgy" of functioning heating systems, and there could be no talk of a joint decision by the coalition.
The SPD tried to calm things down: “In any case, we keep an eye on the financial performance, the social impact and the feasibility.
We must not play off the climate crisis against the housing crisis.
The heat transition must be socially acceptable and technically feasible," said parliamentary group leader Verena Hubertz to SPIEGEL.
The e-fuels dispute:
After a long struggle, the Greens and FDP have agreed on the approval of so-called e-fuels.
These alternative fuels, the production of which requires many times more energy than the operation of e-cars, are intended to ensure the operation of combustion experiences beyond the year 2035.
The FDP had made this a condition for the approval of a project that had actually already been agreed on at EU level: the ban on combustion engines in new cars from 2035. Transport Minister Volker Wissing (FDP) threatened to only agree to this if E -Fuels continued to be allowed.
The maneuver that the FDP Education Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger should have carried out at the meeting of the EU Education Ministers is reminiscent of the glyphosate vote by the former Agriculture Minister Christian Schmidt (CSU).
Single-handedly, he had brought down a European project – since then they call such games in Brussels German Vote.
The coalition partners are not really happy with this compromise, which is unlikely to improve the Ministry of Transport's carbon footprint.
And here, too, the assessment of green and yellow differs significantly.
FDP parliamentary group leader Christian Dürr spoke of a "breakthrough for climate protection," "one can rub one's eyes in astonishment," scolded Green transport politician Stefan Gelbhaar to SPIEGEL.
Unnecessarily, Wissing is “just about as popular as his fickle predecessor Scheuer”, the green environmental politicians spoke of “pseudo-solutions”.
The junk food dispute:
The Green Minister of Agriculture, Cem Özdemir, wants to ban advertising for unhealthy food aimed at children and young people.
In doing so, he presents himself as the executor of the coalition agreement.
This stipulates that in the future there will no longer be any advertising aimed at children for foods with a high sugar, fat and salt content in programs and formats for under 14-year-olds.
He has the SPD on his side in this project.
But here, too, there is a risk of conflict with the FDP.
“Fundamental bans would result in children being shielded but not educated.
That misses the core of the problem," said parliamentary group leader Christian Dürr to SPIEGEL.
The biofuel dispute:
The Greens and FDP have long been at odds over the future of fuels that are made from crops, so-called biofuel, better known as E10.
Green Environment Minister Steffi Lemke wants to abolish biofuel by abolishing funding for it by 2030.
Here, too, the FDP opposes.
Transport Minister Wissing needs biofuels to meet climate targets, which he will probably miss anyway.
And his party fears for the affected fuel industry.
Ironically, this was exactly what had grown up during the time of the first red-green government, since the Greens had initially opted for biofuel with verve.
Now the fuel manufacturers, but also farmers, are worried about their business basis.
In this dispute, the fronts have hardened – the ministers are hoping for the coalition committee, which, according to SPIEGEL information, is to take place at the end of March.
The meeting was actually scheduled for Wednesday, but was then canceled because the Greens and FDP had not reached an agreement.
The Autobahn dispute:
The FDP and the Greens have also been struggling for a long time to speed up planning in the transport sector.
Last fall, SPIEGEL published the draft for a planning acceleration law.
A list was immediately attached: 46 projects where not only repairs are to be carried out, but also new ones and expansions.
These include controversial projects such as the A100 in Berlin, which is the subject of a heated argument in the capital.
Or the A20, which is supposed to lead through the moors of the north.
The Greens oppose this and refer to the coalition agreement, which provides for a climate check of the existing road construction projects - and will prioritize renovation before new construction or even expansion.
A number of rounds of talks have so far been unsuccessful.
The dispute over basic child security:
The Greens and FDP are also crossed in social policy.
Family Minister Lisa Paus (Greens) wants to advance basic child security.
It was agreed in the coalition agreement.
Family policy benefits such as child benefit and child allowance, Hartz IV benefits or child allowance are to be combined in it in the future.
FDP boss Lindner is too expensive.
It doesn't necessarily make sense to "transfer more money," he said.
From his point of view, the main focus is on digitization and simplification of funding.
Paus, on the other hand, is pushing for quick implementation and more money for families.
It is difficult to imagine how the Greens and FDP want to come together here.
This creates the feeling of a permanent loop: Again and again, the FDP and the Greens negotiate about things on which there was actually an agreement before - for example in the coalition agreement, with which they wanted to establish a new style, even a new, future-oriented policy.
The spectacle repeats itself - and will continue to repeat itself.
After losing four state elections - in Lower Saxony and Berlin the Liberals were kicked out of the state parliament - the FDP is struggling with its role in the coalition.
In a survey in December, two-thirds of Germans were dissatisfied with the traffic light.
Nothing has happened since then that would have been likely to cause the values to rise again.