Rülke: We must solve education problems together

FDP parliamentary group leader - Rülke: We must solve educational problems together

Under pressure from the poor results in the latest Pisa education study and the ongoing debate about the nine-year grammar school, the FDP is seeking a cross-party consensus on the most controversial issues in education. FDP parliamentary group leader Hans-Ulrich Rülke suggests that the leaders of the CDU, SPD and Green parliamentary groups could discuss "an alliance for good education" with the Liberals. What does he mean by this and what are his chances of success?

What does Rülke say he wants to achieve?

Rülke says that the aim of such consultations must be a compromise that can only be achieved at the expense of one's own points of view. Such a compromise must be sustainable in the long term. It should not be called into question at every state election, demands the Liberal parliamentary group leader.

Which topics should be addressed from the FDP 's point of view?

Rülke believes that the talks should focus on three main issues. "We should agree on the future of grammar schools, on the path to G9," he suggests. "And we should agree on the future of vocational education. We also want to reach an agreement on the importance of early childhood education."

That's a lot of wood. Couldn't this be better tackled separately?

Not if Rülke has his way. In his view, the issues need to be tackled as a whole: "I don't think it's right to strive for a fragmented school structure and always pick out just one type of school and discuss it until another legislative period is over and the next type of school comes along." The three topics of grammar school, vocational education and early childhood education belong together. "And that's why we want to try and find a structural solution that will last for several legislative periods."

That would mean that the FDP would also address the debate about elementary school recommendations, wouldn't it?

No, the FDP does not want the other parliamentary groups to decide on a binding recommendation when a child transfers to secondary school. Rülke sees little chance of a compromise. "We are excluding contentious issues such as binding elementary school recommendations, we won't come together on that," he says. "That will indeed be something that voters will have to decide in 2026."

Why is the FDP parliamentary group leader making the suggestion?

Naturally, he wants to take the reins and exert pressure on the other parliamentary groups. After all, as an opposition politician, he believes he has little chance against the green-black majority in the state parliament. With such a proposal, Rülke can also show that he is solution-oriented. After all, education is likely to play a central role in the upcoming state elections. According to a survey conducted by the Ifo Institute in Munich last summer, school and education policy is important for 77% of people in Baden-Württemberg when making a decision in the voting booth. And the list of shortcomings is long. It ranges from the lack of teachers and the major problems with basic skills at elementary school to the slump in vocational qualifications.

Does the ruling green-black coalition see it the same way?

The two coalition parties are not in complete agreement. CDU parliamentary group leader Manuel Hagel is convinced: "We need a holistic update for our educational landscape." It is important to discuss without blinkers and without bans on thinking, says Hagel and welcomes Rülke's proposal: "We are super open to a format in which we look to the future and ensure that all reasonable parties work together." It was "right and a strong signal" from Rülke to offer non-partisan cooperation. However, a debate must take into account the means and personnel resources.

And the Greens?

The larger of the two coalition partners reportedly sees little point in such a round and would rather not be involved. Green parliamentary group leader Andreas Schwarz did say: "We are open to viable concepts that extend beyond the legislature." He added that everyone was invited to contribute to solutions, especially when it came to strengthening early childhood education and elementary school - particularly in reading, arithmetic and writing. However, he was also astonished by Rülke: "Didn't he recently make fun of the citizens' forum on G8/G9 and call it a 'talking shop'?"

How did the SPD react to Rülke's invitation?

Like the CDU, the SPD is also open to talks. "We have also been calling for a compromise across party lines for a long time and are appealing to common sense," says party and parliamentary group leader Andreas Stoch. There is a lot of homework to be done in education. However, the CDU and FDP in particular should not "cling to educational dogmas from the day before yesterday" during talks. From Stoch's point of view, it would be a huge step forward if the course could be reliably set. However, red lines should not be drawn before the talks.

The AfD is expressly not inviting Rülke. What does it say?

In the view of AfD parliamentary group leader Anton Baron, Rülke and the other parliamentary groups are concerned with self-profiling and actionism. "They can't and don't want to solve the problems - which, incidentally, they have deliberately caused themselves," says Baron. The AfD parliamentary group leader believes that the problems should be tackled at their roots, citing elementary school recommendations and the high proportion of children without German language skills as examples.