Every day counts, but the federal emergency brake will not be decided before the next week at the earliest. The bill has not even been finalized between the coalition factions.
With a harmless slip of the tongue, the last speaker involuntarily gives the debate the appropriate heading. The SPD wanted to put a nationwide regulation on the agenda as early as November, says Johannes Fechner, the legal policy spokesman for the SPD parliamentary group. “That was not what our colleagues from the Union wanted at the time.” And he continues: “But never better than late.”
Better never than late, it could almost be the motto of the corona policy of the federal and state governments. To change that, the coalition has introduced the “draft of a fourth law to protect the population in an epidemic situation of national scope” in the Bundestag. With the exception of the AfD, all speakers point out that time is of the essence. Nevertheless, there was no majority to speed up the procedure in the Bundestag, which is why the law cannot be passed until next Wednesday. In view of the increasing number of infections, this is not exactly a fast pace. “Every day counts,” Health Minister Jens Spahn said the day before.
It is left parliamentary group leader Dietmar Bartsch who names the elephant in the room and speaks directly to Merkel: “You said to Anne Will: We don’t have much time. That was three weeks ago. Nothing has happened since then.”
“The situation is serious, and very serious”
At the beginning, the Chancellor herself made it clear why the debate was taking place. The provisional last federal-state round on corona policy, the so-called MPK (Prime Minister’s Conference), took place on March 22nd, it lasted until well after midnight and resulted in the later failed “Easter peace”. Merkel says that she saw this conference as a turning point, “and I know that it wasn’t just me, but many of us.”
It was much longer ago that anything “happened” at all, that uniform nationwide rules were agreed: On March 3, at the beginning of the third wave, the Prime Ministers and the Chancellor decided to relax a whole series of measures – “against the better Knowledge “, as the Green Party leader Katrin Göring-Eckardt emphasized in her speech. That was more than six weeks ago, and there have been no nationwide resolutions since then.
Merkel therefore prefers to concentrate on the emergency brake that was also decided on at the time. The planned addition to the Infection Protection Act means: “We are implementing the emergency brake nationwide.” The situation is serious, “and very seriously, and we all have to take it seriously”. With the nationwide regulation, the pandemic fight will be put “on new feet”.
Most political groups would go that far. It becomes restless in the plenary chamber when Merkel starts talking about the exit restrictions. These are not a new invention, but already laid out in the current Infection Protection Act and are also already being used in many federal states. Other countries would also have exit restrictions, “considerably more restrictive” than in Germany.
The Chancellor is very annoyed
She knows very well that some aerosol researchers point out that meetings in the fresh air are not dangerous, but it is about something else, namely to reduce “evening visitor movements”. Although the Chancellor speaks calmly, one can get the impression that she is annoyed by the constant criticism of every measure. It is not just the curfews: “Schools and daycare centers close at the latest from an incidence of 200 – yes or no. Establish home office even more strongly – yes or no. Compulsory test offer from employers – yes or no. Click and meet in shops – yes or no No.”
At the end of her speech, the Chancellor thanked the citizens, as usual. She then says something with which she should speak from the soul of many who listen: “We politicians really don’t always make it easy for you.”
The speeches that followed made it clear that this draft law will not come out of parliament as it was introduced. In addition to the exit restrictions, this primarily affects the involvement of the Bundestag. The left faction is particularly upset about this. The left-wing economic politician Klaus Ernst complains that the law is “a license” for the federal government so that it can “do what it wants”. He asks the deputy Union parliamentary group chairman Thorsten Frei from the CDU why the law did not include mandatory tests at the workplace. He then gives the answer himself: “Because you are hanging on the backs of the employers’ associations!”
SPD announces improvements
Freely replied that the authorization to issue ordinances is subject to the approval of the Bundestag and Bundesrat, but that is not entirely true. The draft law currently states that ordinances of the federal government “require the approval of the Bundestag and Bundesrat” – with the restriction that the approval of the Bundestag is deemed to have been granted if the parliament “does not refuse approval within seven days of receipt of the submission by the federal government Has”. What is required is not express consent, but waiver of objection.
SPD parliamentary group vice-president Dirk Wiese says there should be no contradicting solution, every federal regulation requires the approval of the German Bundestag. The SPD is also aiming to make changes to the exit restrictions between 9 p.m. and 5 a.m., which should apply in counties with a seven-day incidence of over 100. Individual sports after 9 p.m. must be possible, said Wiese. “When someone comes home from work and has had a long day, there has to be an opportunity to go jogging, to go for a walk, to be outside”.
Lauterbach calls for pragmatism
The rest of the debate is the usual exchange of blows on corona politics. AfD parliamentary group leader Alice Weidel accuses the federal government of trying “bypassing the Basic Law, under the pretext of infection protection, to introduce emergency legislation through the back door, which our constitution does not provide for good reasons”.
FDP parliamentary group leader Christian Lindner agrees with Merkel and says that the situation is serious and that “quick, effective and legally secure” action must be taken. With a view to the exit restrictions, Lindner announces a lawsuit from his parliamentary group before the Federal Constitutional Court and then makes a little fun of the “chairman of the caution team”, Bavarian Prime Minister Markus Söder, who has also relaxed in his state. In a reaction to Lindner, SPD health expert Karl Lauterbach says that in no country has it been possible to get a wave with a B.1.1.7 variant under control without exit restrictions. “We need pragmatism and not mutual clarification of everything that doesn’t work.”
Left faction leader Bartsch declares the federal government’s complete fight against pandemics to have failed. “You are rock solid with children and families in the fight against pandemics, but with the economy you are waxy.” Göring-Eckardt, however, emphasizes that the planned law is not enough. “It’s not enough to break the third wave.” An incidence of 100 is too late for an emergency brake. Curfews are not proportionate as long as the economy is spared the obligation to test. Home office must also be compulsory “and it must also be controlled”.
Of course, it also has to be quick. Actually.
.