Dispute in the Bundestag: is the emergency over or not?

Dispute in the Bundestag
Is the emergency over or not?

From Volker Petersen

Questions that the “epidemic emergency of national scope” should come to an end raises questions. The Union and the traffic light are bitterly arguing about this in the Bundestag. The possible future government explains why the emergency is not over and still a new law is needed.

The first big debate in the Bundestag since the election in September was the same. The future traffic light coalition argued with the opposition about the right measures to take against the fourth corona wave. The numbers that morning had shown how serious the situation is. More than 45,000 new infections, a seven-day incidence of over 250 and more and more hospitalizations and severe courses. The day before, the virologist Christian Drosten had warned that Germany was threatened with 100,000 more deaths in the coming winter.

The fact that it is precisely in this situation that the “epidemic situation of national scope” should come to an end raises questions. Because Germany could actually face the worst phase of the pandemic. Exactly then took off the Union, which attacked the speakers from the SPD, Greens and FDP hard. “That’s a denial of reality,” complained parliamentary group leader Ralph Brinkhaus. He described it as a serious mistake to let the epidemic situation come to an end.

That makes sense if one understands the end of this situation as the official end of the pandemic. That would actually be strange in view of the increasingly dramatic situation. But it’s not that simple. The “epidemic situation of national scope” is only the legal basis that has allowed the federal government in the past 20 months to enact drastic measures such as lockdowns, curfews and contact restrictions.

Göring-Eckardt: It takes legal certainty

The law states that this is the case if a “threatening communicable disease threatens to spread across several countries in the Federal Republic of Germany” or if this is already happening. That is exactly what is still the case, said Brinkhaus. But this question is controversial among lawyers. Because with more than two thirds fully vaccinated, it is questionable whether the danger to public health is still there. It is definitely not as big as it was a year ago, when no one was vaccinated.

That is exactly why the SPD, Greens and FDP decided to let the “situation” run out. Because it has to be extended every three months, which has happened over and over again in the past few months. This should end on November 25th. Traffic light representatives such as the Green parliamentary group leader Katrin Göring-Eckardt emphasized that the possible new government is about enabling measures that could not then be collected by the courts. There should be legal certainty – which, in their opinion, would no longer be guaranteed with the epidemic situation.

But if the emergency runs out, a new legal basis must be found. The SPD, Greens and FDP have now presented the draft. The contents were already known before the session in the Bundestag. 3G should come in the workplace, and the federal states should also be allowed to introduce 2G, to which SPD Chancellor candidate Olaf Scholz also encouraged and also announced a new Prime Minister’s conference for the coming week. In addition, there is a compulsory test for nursing staff in old people’s homes. But something is missing: The possibility of lockdown and contact restrictions is no longer provided.

No more lockdowns possible

So the Union is right when it criticizes that fewer resources are available than before. Brinkhaus said that the rights of the countries would be weakened and options for action curtailed. However, Union politicians have always emphasized in recent months that there should not be new lockdowns anyway. On the other hand, the newly planned measures go beyond what was previously possible. Brinkhaus criticized the law as inadequate. Göring-Eckardt asked him to make specific suggestions and was open to incorporate them. Since the legislative process has only just begun, that would theoretically be possible.

The Union argued that ending the pandemic emergency will inevitably seem like the pandemic is indeed over. That was “the completely wrong signal in terms of communication,” said Brinkhaus. This is exactly what intensive care physicians criticized like Uwe Janssens, when Health Minister Jens Spahn, known to be a CDU member, also called for an end to the emergency several weeks ago.

The traffic light representatives rejected this view. The parliamentary managing director of the FDP, Marco Buschmann, said, for example, that the name of the old package led to misunderstandings and that he had the impression that these were deliberately stirred up. “We give the countries everything they need,” he promised. In some federal states, 90 percent of the deaths in nursing homes were to be mourned last winter, he said. In view of this situation, those who find the old package of measures better will misunderstand the situation.

The question of whether the planned new instruments will be sufficient is open – also because the traffic light has not dared to make vaccinations in nursing homes. Because otherwise too many nurses could change jobs, as it was said. But the vast majority of Germans would be okay with that. According to a Forsa survey for the trend barometer from RTL and ntv, it is at least 73 percent. Göring-Eckardt touched on the question, but said, as before, that it would only take effect in “many weeks”. But one could not avoid the discussion. It started with the first reading of the law. It should finally come into force on November 19th.

.
source site-34