New round in the heating law
The Union has 90 questions to the traffic light
By Hubertus Volmer
8/3/2023 1:33 p.m
With 90 questions, the Union heralds a new round in the dispute over the heating law before the end of the summer break. She wants to use it to reveal conflicts within the coalition, but also to collect arguments for the pending proceedings in Karlsruhe.
The CDU and CSU have presented the federal government with a catalog of 90 questions about the heating law that they believe are still open. In the small question that is available to ntv.de, the Union faction complains that the legislative process for the heating law has become “a shadow process and thus a farce”.
The reason for the criticism: According to coalition politicians, the finished draft law differs significantly from the text originally introduced in the Bundestag. The Union faction quotes FDP faction leader Christian Dürr, who spoke of “fundamental changes”. Concrete amendments were only “transmitted to the MPs on July 4, 2023 at 5:48 p.m.”. With reference to the timing of the deliberations, the CDU MP Thomas Heilmann had already prevented the passage of the heating law before the summer break with an urgent application to the Federal Constitutional Court.
As a rule, small inquiries must be answered in writing by the Federal Government within 14 days. Normally, with small inquiries, the questions are not already reported, but only the answer. Small inquiries are also a public relations tool, especially for MPs from opposition factions.
Organ dispute proceedings are still ongoing in Karlsruhe
The Union faction could probably have answered some of the questions themselves or clarified them with the help of a simple internet search. With other questions she is obviously trying to rekindle the dispute over the heating law within the coalition.
For example, the Union faction wants to know from the federal government how it assesses the “fundamental change” in its draft law: “From the federal government’s point of view, is it still a draft law that essentially corresponds to the original draft and how is this assessment justified?” With an answer to this question, the Union faction could also substantiate its argument that the rights of the MPs were violated in the legislative process. This question has not yet been finally decided with the urgent application, Heilmann has also applied for organ dispute proceedings in Karlsruhe.
Other questions are aimed at the content of the heating law. The 33rd question is, for example, whether the planned obligation to provide advice should also apply in the event of an accident and how the Federal Government envisages implementation in such cases. Other questions are about state subsidies, tenant protection, available craftsmen, the further parliamentary procedure and whether the federal government still sees a need for changes to the current draft law.
Union calls for “fundamental revision”
Heilmann said the Building Energy Act was not mature and urgently needed at least clarification. “A fundamental revision of the heating plans would be correct,” he told the German Press Agency. “Unfortunately, the traffic light is blocked. The federal government’s subsidy disaster is particularly bad for the necessary conversion of the heating systems in Germany. It looks like further cuts are on the cards, but the government remains unclear.”
The heating law, which is officially called the Building Energy Law (GEG), was actually supposed to be passed at the beginning of July. Previously, there had been ongoing and profound conflicts between the SPD, Greens and FDP on the subject. In order to get the law through the Bundestag before the summer recess, the coalition introduced a bill to the Bundestag that it was clear would still be revised.
The law aims to make heating in Germany more climate-friendly by gradually replacing oil and gas heating systems. The government factions want to make a decision in the Bundestag after the parliamentary summer break at the beginning of September, right in the first week of the session. The heads of the government factions had declared that there should be no more substantive changes to the draft law. The FDP had already asked a comprehensive list of questions about the GEG in May, to the Ministry of Economics. There were 77 questions.