Dobrindt grumbles the traffic lights into the ground
Wild budget debate on "Anne Will": Following the ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court, Alexander Dobrindt and Katrin Göring-Eckardt argue about who is to blame for the budget mess and how to get out of it. The traffic lights receive harsh criticism, Dobrindt mutates into a troublemaker.
A show like a sandpit fight. At the very end, Anne Will even has to stand up in her ARD talk show on Sunday evening to silence the squabblers. The panel bicker wildly about the ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court, which declared the second supplementary budget of the coalition government for 2021 "null and void", who is to blame for what and how the 60 billion euros could still flow into climate protection measures and the climate-neutral conversion of industry. Above all, however, the program shows that the traffic lights and politics in Germany are at a crossroads.
Alexander Dobrindt is the poster boy of the panel discussion and he goes on the offensive from the outset. "The ruling has created clarity about the working style of the traffic light," says the riotous chairman of the CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag. "They have come up with a trick to cheat the debt brake." Everything that the traffic light has done in the last three years has been "based on fraud".
Bundestag Vice President Katrin Göring-Eckardt responded by saying that everyone in the government had assumed that the budget was "not unconstitutional". According to the Green politician, you don't even deliberately break the constitution "when you lead such a difficult coalition" as the Ampel. Johannes Vogel, deputy federal chairman of the FDP, added that the ruling should be dealt with "humbly", but was left reeling when talk show host Will confronted him with the fact that his party leader Christian Lindner's recent statements had come across quite differently.
"Mr. Dooobrindt. Really."
"Spiegel" journalist Melanie Amann briefly notes a "huge shock for the traffic light", which has been "caught completely cold", and IFO President Clemens Fuest explains that you have to "leave the church in the village", because it is only 60 billion euros, "an amount that can be managed somehow". Then the arguing begins. It gets wild. Attack salvos and disruptive fire from all sides. How should the traffic lights deal with the ruling? Where will the missing money for climate protection come from? What will happen to the debt brake? What comes out of it is rarely substantial.
After Dobrindt is "outraged" that "people in the traffic light are acting as if the ruling never happened" and suggests that the federal government should cut spending, for example on the citizens' income, Göring-Eckardt wants to defend herself. But she hardly gets a chance to speak. The CSU politician repeatedly cuts her off and cuts her off. This happens as follows:
Göring-Eckardt says that it is now essential to talk about how workers are faring, what the economy, which is worried, is saying, and how things are going for the climate fund. After all, "the climate targets are also a constitutional court ruling". Dobrindt countered, initially politely: "Excuse me, I can't let you get away with that". The Green politician wants to know whether he doesn't think the climate ruling is important. "Please stick to the truth, Ms Göring-Eckardt," the CSU politician demands when Göring-Eckhardt says that side budgets also existed in previous governments. Dobrindt interrupts her again and again. The Green politician reacts in frustration: "Mr. Doooobrindt. Really." The urgently needed money for the climate fund is about the core of the economy, she can finally explain.
"Rubbish!" shouts Dobrindt
Next, Dobrindt gets into an argument with Vogel. When the FDP man talks about his "very serious" approach to the ruling, the CSU politician grumbles: "That's a bold statement." Vogel falls back into the duo: "Dear Alexander Dobrindt, I let you go on a little longer earlier, maybe you'll let me now." The liberal wants a budget that provides work for more people, without naming specific measures. "Don't we need to reform the pension system?" he suddenly suggests. Dobrindt: "Now it's getting outrageous."
Talk show host Will wants to know what will now happen to the climate projects for which the money is missing. "Of course there is still a climate transformation fund," says Vogel, but the plans "have to be changed by prioritizing." Not all projects need to be tackled immediately. Dobrindt then intervenes again: "So abolish the Heating Act now?" A government "that works" would now sit down together honestly, he rumbles. Göring-Eckardt tries to explain that this is exactly what is currently happening until the expert hearing on Tuesday, after which the budget is to be decided in a special digital session on Thursday, but the CSU politician interrupts again. "Now it was my turn," the Vice-President of the Bundestag sobered up and accused her counterpart of having "destructive ambitions".
Göring-Eckardt said it was important that there was a budget for 2024 at all, because otherwise no aid could be paid out to Ukraine, for example. "Rubbish!" interjects Dobrindt. The country must not be made even more unstable and the climate ruling and the budget ruling must be reconciled, she continues. "You have prepared a fraud," he thunders. Göring-Eckardt is also becoming increasingly annoyed. "It was all in public, we live in a democracy." Dobrindt: "Everything they said is wrong." Göring-Eckardt: "It has to be fair."
Göring-Eckardt gives up, Will must de-escalate
IFO President Fuest, who wants to further increase the CO₂ price, examine cuts to the budget and then introduce a "new special fund" for climate transformation, then gets specific. "We absolutely need more investment in the areas of digitalization and climate protection," he says. However, the traffic lights also showed in the panel discussion that they are unlikely to agree on many points in order to achieve the 60 billion euros for climate protection.
Göring-Eckardt proposes reforming the debt brake, but Vogel also emphasizes that this is of course a no-go for the FDP. The Green politician also wants to scrutinize a number of "environmentally harmful subsidies": The abolition of tax breaks for kerosene and international flights as well as for tax breaks for privately used company cars could save "tens of billions of euros" every year. However, their coalition partner from the FDP considers the plans to be "unsuitable".
After its budget mess, the traffic light coalition really is at a crossroads, because confidence in the government continues to decline and a sensible budget is needed. Also for the climate. When Dobrindt and Vogel suddenly throw accusations at each other on the subject of migration and Göring-Eckardt slumps in her chair, half annoyed, half amused, talk show host Will has to stand up. Only then do the men sullenly give up.
Journalist Amann has the final word on the question of whether the government will break up over the dispute about the ruling: "We will continue to muddle through," she says, "but the traffic lights have already been broken since the heating law." Then any further sandbox bickering breaks up with the end credits melody.
Source: www.ntv.de
