Tug of war over the 2025 budget - How the SPD leadership is preventing a members' referendum on the budget
Saskia Esken initially says nothing about it, implying there's nothing to explain. Only upon inquiry does the SPD chairwoman comment on a contentious decision that could cause unrest among the ranks.
Members of the "Forum DL21" intended to start a membership initiative to prevent budget cuts (read more here). However, this plan was declared invalid. The basis for this decision is a legal opinion for the SPD executive board, which is criticized as "questionable" and "contradictory."
The serious allegation: The opinion was intended to quash the membership initiative.
Significant Pressure on Deputies?
Esken addressed the matter on a Monday morning. She stated in the Berlin SPD headquarters atrium that "Forum DL21" is not an official SPD organization, nor is it just an SPD association. Only three members of the association, who were also SPD members, had submitted the application for the initiative. Therefore, she dealt with it.
What Esken did not mention: The proposal had a much broader base, was supported by the powerful Jusos, as well as the "SPD Seniors" and "SPD Women." The necessary votes for the membership initiative would likely have been gathered.
The catch: The party executive board should have initiated the vote.
At "Forum DL21," there is considerable confusion. "To reject the membership initiative with such a legally questionable and contradictory justification is not a good signal," it is stated there. "For a party that sees itself as a members' party, this is more than disappointing."
In the two-page opinion obtained by stern, the membership initiative on the budget is referred to as an "immediate interference in the state sphere." SPD parliamentarians were called upon to approve the federal budget only under specified conditions. "This would significantly interfere with the free mandate exercise under Art. 38 GG," it states. A corresponding vote would "exert considerable pressure" on the deputies and their decision-making freedom. Consequently, it was deemed inadmissible.
Or is the SPD leadership afraid of its own courage? Of the potential consequences of a grassroots vote that might have failed against budget cuts for 2025? Of its own party base, which is simmering after the poor European election results?
The Social Democrats stand united against painful savings, as shown in a joint declaration of the three very different faction streams. However, the coalition summit negotiations are proving challenging. In particular, the Liberals are pushing for cuts, even in social spending. A red line for the SPD – but also for their Chancellor, who aims for a compromise in the coalition budget committee?
A binding SPD base vote would not be legally binding, but at least a political signal with the party flagpole. The party leadership, including the Chancellor, would have been restrained – with a coalition breakup as the last consequence. A scenario that would have put significant pressure on the SPD leadership.
In the party headquarters, Co-CEO Esken emphasizes narrowly. She refuses to go any further with the justification, she says, as it is already known. "In our opinion, the petition (*the referendum, Anm. of the editor.) is inadmissible because the legislative process for the budget lies exclusively in the Bundestag," explains Esken.
The Left faction of "Forum DL21" is not convinced by this. They raise fundamental doubts about the argumentation. "In essence, the assessment of the party leadership means that practically no political decisions can be made through the instrument of member initiatives." Moreover, the legal assessment contains contradictions.
On the one hand, it is pointed out that a member initiative on the budget is inadmissible because the resolutions of the party have no effect on the free mandate of the MPs. On the other hand, reference is made to the result of a member initiative on the coalition contract in 2013, which obligated the MPs to implement the coalition contract.
So when is a party resolution valid – and when not?
"Of course, a coalition agreement is something different from a budget," Esken nods at the Willy-Brandt-House. Coalition agreements are signed by parties, budgets by the parliament. Moreover, within the SPD, discussions about what this budget should not be – a budget cut, for example – have not only started since the initiative of the member referendum.
Whether the party base will be satisfied with this explanation is questionable. Unrest among the ranks is growing. They want to know where the journey is going.
This week, Chancellor Scholz is expected to make a political statement on the budget draft before it is decided in the cabinet at a later date. The SPD faction had demanded this from the Chancellor before the parliament goes into summer recess.
The fact that the member referendum on the budget – for the time being – has been removed from the table can hardly calm the situation. The Left faction of "Forum DL21" now wants to carefully and calmly examine how and whether their member referendum on the budget can continue. The same applies to further initiatives, such as the minimum wage of 15 euros, for example, or a nationwide rent cap.
Where is the SPD heading? There is a need for dialogue within the party.
- Saskia Esken was faced with a request for membership in "Forum DL21" to prevent budget cuts, which was eventually declared invalid by the SPD executive board.
- Despite not being officially recognized, the membership initiative had broad support from Jusos, SPD Seniors, and SPD Women, potentially gaining the necessary votes.
- The SPD executive board argued that the initiative would interfere with the free mandate of MPs and subject them to significant pressure, deeming it inadmissible.
- The Left faction of "Forum DL21" raised concerns about the justification, questioning when a party resolution is valid and when not.
