Skip to content

Greens allege "wild award procedures" at mask manufacturers - Spahn must justify himself

Topical hour in the Bundestag

"The processes for purchasing protective masks at the start of the coronavirus pandemic raise many...
"The processes for purchasing protective masks at the start of the coronavirus pandemic raise many questions."

Greens allege "wild award procedures" at mask manufacturers - Spahn must justify himself

Former German Health Minister Jens Spahn (CDU) defended in the Bundestag the controversial procurement of several billions of protective masks at the beginning of the Corona-Pandemic. "It was about saving lives and yes, we needed masks and yes, we procured masks," said Spahn in a recent news hour on Thursday. "Was it expensive? Yes." Previously, the Greens had criticized the mask procurement sharply.

Many had demanded the procurement of masks "at any price" at the beginning of the pandemic, said the CDU politician. Whoever wanted to protect the healthcare system had to "take precautions in such a situation." He had done so "according to the principle 'having is better than needing'". With the knowledge we have today, he would "make some decisions differently, without a doubt," added Spahn - but: "We had to make decisions in a crisis." In total, Germany had come through this difficult period "quite well" in international comparison.

The Greens had criticized Spahn sharply in the news hour earlier. "A crisis should not be a free pass for completely uncontrolled action," said Green fraction vice-chair Andreas Audretsch. He spoke of "completely wild procurement procedures" and "shady deals" between the federal government and mask manufacturers.

Spahn had guaranteed suppliers an unlimited acceptance of masks at a price of 4.50 Euro per FFP2 mask at the beginning of 2020. Later, the ministry refused payment in part, among other things, due to incorrect or delayed deliveries. Ultimately, a large part of the masks were not needed.

Suppliers are now suing the federal government. According to the Federal Health Ministry, there are approximately a hundred cases with a total dispute value of around 2.3 billion Euro.

"Billions of Euro have been wasted," emphasized Audretsch. "We are talking about one of the greatest tax waste scandals that has ever existed in the Federal Republic." The Green politician spoke of a "loss of control" by the previous government. In view of the strained budget situation, "we cannot and should not ignore a billion-dollar scandal in this magnitude."

CDU health politician Tino Sorge defended Spahn's decisions: "It's ridiculous that things are made into a scandal that aren't one," said Sorge. "That's below dignity and morality." Sorge accused the Greens of "window-dressing politics." The Greens had "spread Querdenker theories in a more serious tone."

SPD politician Martina Stamm-Fibich, whose party today governs with Karl Lauterbach as Federal Health Minister, referred to the uncertainty at the time. "The procurement of personal protective equipment was not an easy task in this chaotic situation," emphasized she. "There should be no witch hunt." Nevertheless, it was necessary "to critically examine what happened back then." No one should evade responsibility.

Kristine Lütkе from the FDP said the case bordered on negligence. It "shows a lack of respect for the performance of taxpayers."

  1. Despite the Greens' criticism of the mask procurement process during the Corona-Pandemic, former Health Minister Jens Spahn defended his actions in Bundestag, stating that they were necessary to protect lives and save resources.
  2. Green fraction vice-chair Andreas Audretsch criticized Spahn's handling, claiming that the mask procurement procedures were uncontrolled, resulting in shady deals with mask manufacturers and wasting billions of Euros.
  3. In response to Audretsch's criticism, Tino Sorge from the CDU defended Spahn's decisions, labeling the situation a "scandal" made into a controversy by the Greens, while Kristine Lütkе from the FDP accused the previous government of negligence and disrespect for taxpayers' efforts.

Read also:

Comments

Latest