Friday October 15, 2021
Union vice sees left slide
Bartsch to Ampel: “Little concrete, a lot of poetry”
A majority of business representatives praised the future coalition’s program. There have even been positive reactions from the DGB. The Union and the left, on the other hand, are asking who should pay for the announced program. Above all, consumer and environmentalists see many missed opportunities so far.
The parliamentary groups, which remain outside the coalition negotiations, do not shy away from violent criticism of the exploratory paper by the SPD, Greens and FDP. Various associations also see room for improvement in terms of the environment and consumer protection. Union parliamentary group leader Ralph Brinkhaus spoke of a “bad check for the future” because important financing issues had not been resolved. Union parliamentary group Vice Thorsten Frei does not call the program “the middle”, but rather a “hard left slide”. In the area of migration there is “to be feared that their agreements will lead to significantly more unqualified immigration and rising asylum figures. Measures to combat illegal migration are not mentioned”.
“The exploratory result reads like a ‘book of noble projects’. Little concrete, a lot of poetry,” said left parliamentary group leader Dietmar Bartsch to the newspapers of the Funke media group. He also criticizes the vague to open financing, and there is no redistribution. On the other hand, he is positive about the planned basic child security. That is “the right step”, so Bartsch.
Deutsche Umwelthilfe warns that the possible traffic light coalition in the transport sector could gamble away the fight against the climate crisis. Federal Managing Director Jürgen Resch calls for concrete and effective measures: “A combustion engine off 2025, an absolutely necessary speed limit, a real change in mobility with the expansion of pedestrian, bicycle and public transport and a 365-euro ticket”.
No real solar obligation, no speed limit
Christoph Heinrich, CEO of WWF Germany, emphasizes the commitment of the three parties with regard to a faster exit from coal-fired power generation and praises the clear commitment to the 1.5 degree target, but sees a lot of untapped potential. For example, the solar obligation should not only apply to new commercial buildings. The federal budget should not only be checked for environmentally harmful subsidies, but these should ultimately also be abolished. In addition, the speed limit is an absolutely easy-to-pick fruit that the SPD, Greens and FDP simply let hang on the tree. However, he finds the focus on so-called e-fuels, i.e. artificial fuels, rather than directly on electrically powered vehicles particularly devastating.
With reference to the planned accelerated phase-out of coal-fired power generation, which “ideally” should succeed by 2030, the activists of Fridays for Future smugly remark on Twitter that “ideally” students could go to school again on Fridays. The environmental activists, inspired by Greta Thunberg, started to demonstrate for environmental and climate protection on Fridays instead of going to school.
Sharp criticism also comes from the ranks of consumer advocates. Eugen Brysch, Chairman of the Patient Protection Foundation, criticized the Rheinische Post: “Four million people in need of care with the highest increases in spending compared to other population groups are not worth a line at the traffic light. so Brysch.
Klaus Müller, board member of the Federation of German Consumer Organizations, recognizes the commitment of the SPD, the Greens and the FDP, but much more must come when it comes to consumer protection. The consumer report published yesterday, Thursday, showed that 90 percent of those surveyed consider consumer protection to be important for their personal safety. This feeling is not reflected in the program. For example, he calls for social compensation with a view to CO2 pricing. Here money has to flow back to consumers. In view of rising energy prices, housing benefits must rise so that people don’t sit in the cold in winter. In addition, private old-age provision urgently needs a fresh start. “The attempt to save the failed Riester pension by lowering the guarantee would be wrong,” said Müller.