Green climate protection minister Spiegel is part of the traffic light government in Rhineland-Palatinate. In the ntv.de interview, she reveals how the alliance can also succeed in the federal government.

The government in Rhineland-Palatinate, led by Prime Minister Malu Dreyer, consisting of the SPD, the Greens and the FDP, is considered a blueprint for the upcoming coalition in the federal government. In an interview with ntv.de, Green Climate Protection Minister Anne Spiegel advertises the three-party alliance – and reveals the secret of success so that the traffic light works even in times of crisis. The interview took place the afternoon before it was announced that the exploratory talks were successful. Apparently the explorers have taken experience from Rhineland-Palatinate to heart.

ntv.de: Minister Spiegel, you have been ruling in Rhineland-Palatinate since 2016 together with the FDP and SPD and represent the Greens in a traffic light cabinet, which is said to be a role model for the federal government after the federal election. How curious or tense are you looking at your party’s talks with Social Democrats and Liberals in Berlin?

Anne Spiegel: I’m not tense, but tense and curious, because this is a totally exciting time. In addition, there is the expectation that we will be able to catch up quickly in terms of climate policy, which has not been tackled, missed and also wrongly done in recent years.

Your Prime Minister Malu Dreyer is part of the exploratory team of the SPD, your former cabinet colleague Volker Wissing negotiates alongside Christian Lindner for the FDP. Are you personally involved on the side of the Greens?

We all keep a low profile on the details. But the Green Party Council, to which I belong, naturally receives information stands from the exploratory group on a regular basis.

Your party is not as strongly represented in Rhineland-Palatinate as the Greens in the federal government. In the last legislative period, you focused primarily on many small issues such as the climate-neutral state administration and the expansion of nature conservation. Can that be a role model for the Greens in the federal government to achieve a lot with numerous manageable projects in total?

In view of the current coalition agreement, I would not speak of small projects. As the state government, we have big plans: We want to achieve climate neutrality in the corridor between 2035 and 2040. This means that Rhineland-Palatinate has the earliest and most ambitious climate target among the federal states. We want to double the expansion of wind energy and triple the expansion of photovoltaics. These are big lines, even if the concrete implementation breaks down into many small, small measures.

Where do you experience the greatest resistance when it comes to wind power? What lessons does the federal government have to take with it in order to create more local acceptance?

First of all, I experience that a very large majority of people support climate protection in the abstract. The specific projects then raise the questions. The most important thing is communication, i.e. making it transparent what you intend to do and what is step one, two, three and so on. What I also consider to be an important issue for the federal government is that the species crisis must not be played off against the climate crisis. We have therefore set up a moderated process between the environmental and nature conservation associations on the one hand and the wind power project planners and energy experts on the other, in order to promote the expansion of wind energy in a species-appropriate manner.

The green goals for the expansion of photovoltaics in Rhineland-Palatinate went far beyond the ideas of the FDP. The solar roof requirement is now limited to commercial buildings larger than a certain size and will not apply until 2023. Is the compromise still an example for the federal government?

We could have imagined more. But I am very satisfied that we are now giving the expansion of renewables a tailwind because we have a solar law in Rhineland-Palatinate. This shows that you can get good framework conditions off the ground together at the traffic lights.

How did you experience the dispute with the FDP, which is having a hard time making regulations for citizens and companies?

The solar law was a sticking point that was discussed very hard. We had more in the election manifesto than what we agreed on in the compromise. There is agreement that the expansion must go ahead, but the ways to get there were viewed differently. But I think the compromise is very good.

The external perception and perhaps also self-portrayal of the Prime Minister is that Malu Dreyer often takes on the role of mediator between the FDP and the Greens when it comes to climate protection. Is that true and could Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz take this as an example?

No matter which colors coalesce with each other: In my opinion, what is crucial for a government to function well is trust and good cooperation. That is why it is so important to have bilateral talks with one another so that you get to know each other; that one does not read the election programs to each other, but rather stakes out the difficult topics. I think what is currently happening in the federal government is exactly the right thing for a government to develop a sustainable basis. We did it at traffic light one in 2016 and at traffic light two last spring so that we took the time to talk. It may sound banal, but it is very important that you know each other, that you have a close connection to each other, that you can rely on each other.

Does that mean that those involved sometimes have to get together in small, cozy groups for a glass of wine or is it strictly about the working level?

In my opinion, something like that is also very important, a glass of wine or a glass of beer, depending on your taste. Of course, a three-party coalition has a greater need for coordination and coordination than a two-party alliance. That’s only natural. This also requires bilateral talks and a short line so that none of the three parties feel left behind.

Your federal chairman Robert Habeck agreed with your party that government is painful and exhausting because of the many compromises and concessions. Is it really so bad?

I didn’t find it bad, he described it realistically. Of course, governance is different from opposition, and that’s why I think it’s important to manage this change of perspective. It is part of the truth that you cannot get one hundred percent of your election platform through a coalition agreement. It will be the same for all parties. We’ll all have to swallow toads. It is only important that one party does not have to swallow the toads on the assembly line and the others lean back.

Even with a 1: 1 implementation of the Greens election program, it would have been difficult to get Germany on the 1.5-degree path. With the existential demands of the Greens on the next federal government, disappointment is inevitable. Is your party particularly frustrated?

I experience a lot of optimism, that you can turn things around and adopt a different policy than has been the case in the area of ​​climate protection in the last four years. When I think of frustration, I think of all the things Groko didn’t do. I now see a promising time ahead of us. Of course, climate protection will play an important role in the negotiations.

But you will only enforce a fraction of your program in the federal government …

I wouldn’t say that only a fraction will get away with it. When I look at the coalition agreement in Rhineland-Palatinate, I see a very clear green thread in it, and that is climate protection. It runs through the treaty stringently and with it we show here in Rhineland-Palatinate that you can govern well with a traffic light and promote climate protection together.

Any government, no matter how determined, must also deal with events and external dynamics that consume a great deal of capacity. You saw the pandemic and the flood disaster yourself this summer. Against this background, does it make more sense not to undertake too much at the beginning of a government period?

When I look at the area of ​​climate protection, I only see important projects. We cannot wait until, for example, the corona pandemic has been overcome. The decisive factor is that doing one thing does not mean leaving the other behind. Crises like the Ahr Valley disaster are particularly tough on a government. It pays off that you know each other, that you trust each other and that you can coordinate and coordinate well with each other. This is a foundation for coping well with major challenges.

Her chancellor candidate Annalena Baerbock has become the target of some massive agitation. As a young woman in politics, you too are familiar with hostility. How did you experience the federal election campaign?

I have deep respect and am proud of Annalena Baerbock for how she rocked it over the past few months. She did not let herself be disturbed and concentrated on the content, even when it was approached really hard. I’ve been under personal protection myself for three and a half years and of course it’s different when you receive threats. In the municipality of Simmertal, the mayoress, a really great power woman, recently resigned because she was massively attacked by lateral thinkers and from the right. This hostility and threats are poison for democracy, and of course sexism also plays a role here. Regardless of whether federal, state or local authority: We have to make it clear when a red line has been crossed and we have to support each other.

The interview with Climate Protection Minister Anne Spiegel was conducted by Sebastian Huld.

.
source site