Wednesday 17th November 2021
“Not capable of consent”
Union threatens to block the Infection Protection Act
Everyone asserts their goodwill – but the amendment to the Infection Protection Act has long been a plaything of party political interests. For the Union, the thrust and individual measures go in the wrong direction or not far enough. The SPD is unimpressed.
In the struggle for a new version of the Infection Protection Act, there is still no agreement between the Union and the SPD – with potentially serious consequences for the adoption of the amendment in the Federal Council. In a letter available to ntv, NRW Prime Minister Hendrik Wüst informed Federal Finance Minister Olaf Scholz that the bill was “not subject to approval”. The changes agreed the previous evening in the responsible Bundestag committee were not sufficient. There must be further improvements here.
Before the parliamentary group meeting, Scholz replied tersely that he didn’t know a letter but had heard of it. “We have a fairly massive catalog that is now being implemented,” he said, referring to the options in the amendment in the fight against the corona pandemic. Some things go much further than the steps that were taken a year ago at this point in time. “It is a moment when the country has to stick together,” he said, calling on the Union to refrain from playing party-political games.
In contrast, Union parliamentary group leader Ralph Brinkhaus noted that the feedback from the Union-led countries on the planned changes has been “very negative so far”. “The countries are at least very, very severely restricted from a tried and tested set of instruments.” The submission of the traffic light parties was “not sufficient” and their approach was “extremely dangerous”. It cannot be foreseen how the states would ultimately vote in the Federal Council on Friday. “We would have prolonged the epidemic situation of national importance, that is not possible,” said the Union parliamentary group leader. “And I don’t hope we’ll be taught better in three weeks.” His group would submit a motion to prolong the epidemic emergency.
“Irresponsible”
“In view of the erratic and dynamic infection process with the absolute maximum number of new infections, from the B-side’s point of view, the expiry of the epidemic situation is irresponsible,” says Wüst in his letter to Scholz and the Governing Mayor of Berlin, Michael Müller. The Union countries could therefore not agree in the Bundesrat.
“As a minimum, the federal states would have to be able to react flexibly to combat a particularly dynamic infection process,” he continues. Therefore, from the point of view of the Union countries, it is necessary to be able to take the measures previously mentioned in Section 28a of the Act. Only exit restrictions and closings of daycare centers, schools and universities should no longer be allowed.
SPD parliamentary group leader Rolf Mützenich recalled that the day before the Union had abstained from voting in the main committee on changing the law. This was interpreted as an indication that further discussions would take place.
Previously, the parliamentary managing director of the FDP parliamentary group, Marco Buschmann, had already stood up to defend the law. The new Infection Protection Act enables conditions such as a 3G obligation at work and on public transport. Unlike originally planned, contact restrictions in public and private areas should now also be possible. Furthermore, with the consent of the state parliaments, state governments could also order the closure of leisure facilities or conditions, for example for church services.
The FDP politician pointed out that state governments could even impose lockdowns because this is possible under the law that is currently still in force. Restrictions that went beyond those in the new Infection Protection Act could apply until mid-December if a relevant state parliament decides to do so retrospectively.
The Infection Protection Act is to be finally passed in the Bundestag tomorrow, Thursday. The Federal Council should deal with the proposal on Friday. The Union is currently involved in 10 out of 16 state governments and could prevent approval with its votes in the Bundesrat.