Lars Klingbeil is running for a second term as chairman at the SPD party conference, which will take place in Berlin from December 8th to 10th. In the ntv.de interview, the 45-year-old explains his plans for the Social Democrats, which are now preparing for the upcoming federal election. After the verdict on the debt brake, he is demanding “fundamental” talks from the coalition partners in the traffic light – and is harshly attacking the Union because of its jubilation over the verdict.
ntv.de: Mr. Klingbeil, before we talk about the upcoming federal party conference of the SPD: How do you, from a distance, assess the Federal Constitutional Court’s ruling on the debt brake?
Lars Klingbeil: The verdict is a challenge for politics as a whole, for the federal government, but also for the states. I cannot understand the Union’s howls of triumph. This could also pose problems for the budgets of CDU-led states such as North Rhine-Westphalia or Schleswig-Holstein.
But isn’t the Union right when it notes that its view was confirmed by Karlsruhe?
The Union can perhaps be happy that it has won a legal point. The economic policy dimension of this judgment and the political challenges affect all levels that bear responsibility in our country, including the CDU and CSU. It’s no use at all if the Union boys joke about it. We must find a new basis for making the necessary investments in our country’s economic strength, while ensuring that all citizens can afford the climate-neutral transition.
How does the traffic light want to ensure in a short time that the projects financed by the climate and transformation fund can still be financed?
It is clear that we want to pass the budget in December so that everything can go its way in an orderly manner from January 1, 2024. At the same time, we are working on a new economic plan for the climate and transformation fund. I don’t want to sugarcoat the situation, but I still believe that we as a traffic light have the strength to get it done. We will have to talk fundamentally about many things.
Also about possible additional revenue, for example through higher taxes or removal of subsidies?
I said yes, we will have to talk fundamentally about a lot of things. As the SPD, we have a plan on how necessary future investments can be financed. For example, with the help of a Germany fund through which the state and private investors can invest together. Or in which mega-heirs participate more and we change the debt rules. We are aware that not everything in the traffic light coalition can necessarily be implemented overnight. But now it’s also about who has good ideas and puts forward arguments. And we have that.
What does the ruling mean for the funding framework for the Heating Act? Will everyone be able to apply for grants for heating modernization in 2024, as announced?
Immediately after the verdict, the federal government made it clear: All promises made to citizens when heating systems are replaced or houses are newly insulated continue to apply. And we as the SPD will also pay close attention to ensuring that the financial support that we agreed with the heating law is adhered to. We will not let people down in this change.
When we spoke two years ago, you said: “I want to shape my party.” Two years have passed and you are running for a second term as party leader. To what extent have you implemented your plan?
I would say that I have left my mark on the party. After Russia’s brutal attack on Ukraine, I put the SPD’s foreign and security policy on a new footing, which included openly addressing the mistakes of the past and drawing conclusions from them for the future. These were very formative decisions for my party; clear statements had to be made and breaks had to be made. I am grateful for the broad support on this path and would like us to continue on it together in the coming years.
Her co-chair Saskia Esken is submitting a key motion on the future of education policy, and the SPD board is also jointly submitting the motion “Together for a strong Germany”.
We have been working on this together with experts over the last few months. We have a plan for how Germany remains a strong country despite the multiple crises and upheavals that lie ahead of us. We want a million new jobs to be created through climate protection and for the federal and state governments to jointly invest more money in education and infrastructure. We all know that our country is lagging behind in crucial areas.
What other achievements would you recommend for re-election?
The last two years have been marked by many crises and challenges that could not have been foreseen. But we got people through it well, with three relief packages and the cap on gas and electricity prices. It was always clear to me: I wouldn’t leave any coalition committee that didn’t state that we would cushion the rise in prices and ensure justice. The SPD has prevailed when it comes to skimming off excess profits from companies.
They point out the many unplanned topics. Continuity, on the other hand, was primarily due to the calm and unity within the SPD. Also your earnings?
Others have to evaluate that. But I am convinced that the federal election campaign won and Olaf Scholz’s success were made possible by the solidarity at the top of the party. For me personally, team play has a very high value.
But so much unity sometimes makes it difficult to criticize your own government.
I do not think so. Unity doesn’t mean that we always agree on everything, but rather that we fight for the best path internally and then represent it together externally. I believe that is what the citizens expect from us. In the last two years in government, we have kept our social democratic promises: a 12 euro minimum wage, stable pensions, the expansion of housing benefit. With the party conference, the party is now becoming louder again when it comes to the question of how we want to shape the future beyond the legislative period.
Two years ago you also said that the SPD should aim for an even better election result for 2025. Given the polls, has this goal been met?
People are busy with so many things in their everyday lives right now, but not with the question of who they will vote for in two years. In Olaf Scholz we have a Federal Chancellor who will have tackled a lot of things in this country with his government by the time the election campaign comes. Then there will be a reckoning and I am quite sure that there is a lot of potential for the SPD.
Is the SPD’s persistent low in the polls solely due to the external image of the traffic light or are your voters not specifically disappointed with your party?
The public dispute in the coalition has obscured a lot of things and caused people to turn away. The substance of the traffic light is correct. It has been a long time since a federal government had to deal with so many crises in its first two years. We led the country well through this difficult time and at the same time modernized it in some areas.
In the lead motion, they call for, among other things, a relaxation of the debt rule, a special levy for the super-rich and an increase in inheritance tax. Do you see a chance that one of these projects will pass in the current legislative period?
With the party conference we are marking our stance as a party. And that is more than the compromises in the current government with the Greens and FDP. But if Christian Lindner or Robert Habeck decide after our party conference that what the SPD has thought about is very sensible, then we will of course implement it together immediately. We are clear about what we want.
In the public eye, the SPD’s decisive voice is the Federal Chancellor and we don’t hear anything from him – neither about the reform of the debt brake nor about a higher inheritance tax or special levies. How does this work?
We have a social democratic chancellor who acts on the basis of the coalition agreement. But be sure: we are thinking about the future together with Olaf Scholz and are also planning the path thereto together. There is close coordination and yet clarity about the different roles we currently have.
In a Forsa survey commissioned by RTL and ntv, 55 percent of respondents advocate a change from the SPD to a grand coalition, including 54 percent of SPD supporters. What do you say to them?
We currently have a coalition of three parties who all want to change something. We also engage in social debates and sometimes they are jerky, but in doing so we are changing more than was possible with the Union in recent years. Nevertheless, I think it is right to always seek solidarity across the board with the CDU and CSU in such challenging times.
The migration debate recently seemed to be all about limiting immigration. The agreement of the Prime Minister’s Conference on accommodation and integration costs was rather lost. Has there been an imbalance?
Everything belongs together. We are currently fundamentally changing migration policy by massively expanding the opportunities for skilled workers to come to Germany. But it is also important for the state to function when it comes to ensuring that those who cannot stay here leave the country again. And the most important thing for us is integration through the labor market. Anyone who comes to us and has a perspective here should get a job as quickly as possible.
So there is no imbalance in the debate?
We do not make politics with resentment on the backs of people who want to build a better life for themselves in Germany. We ensure that the state functions and integration succeeds.
Migration is also likely to be a huge issue for the SPD state associations in the east, where three state elections are due in 2024. Are you prepared for the AfD to become the strongest party in Brandenburg, Saxony and Thuringia?
The strength of the AfD is not a situation that I agree with, it is a situation that we as the SPD are fighting against. With a very clear course that means: We solve people’s everyday problems, we take care of affordable rents, enough daycare places and decent wages. The Höckes and Weidels have no solutions to these challenges. They want people to feel bad. That is their basis for business. That’s why they turned groups against each other.
Sebastian Huld spoke to Lars Klingbeil