CDU politician ends career: Peter Tauber stops

For “personal and family reasons”, the former CDU general secretary leaves politics. He was firmly on the side of Angela Merkel.

Didn’t give off anything of the musty inner workings of the honorary Christian democracy: Peter Tauber Foto: Christian Spicker/imago

BERLIN taz | Peter Tauber (48) was considered one of the greatest political talents of the Merkel CDU. In 2013 he became its general secretary and seemed an ideal fit for the office. He looked boyish and intellectual, often said “cool” and did not give off any of the musty inner workings of the honorary Christian democracy. But Tauber not only played the role of the brisk modernizer, who also quoted sayings from “Stars Wars” in debates. The first lieutenant in the reserve and devout Christian had also been a supporter of Alfred Dregger, leader of the old steel helmet wing.

However, Tauber brushed off the conservative character. Only when it came to euthanasia was he reliable in the conservative camp. Otherwise, the black-green advocate campaigned for gay marriage and in 2015, to the horror of the right wing and the CSU, for an immigration law.

Tauber did not define the office of General Secretary, which Heiner Geißler, Angela Merkel and Volker Kauder had held and which was often a launch pad for the further way up, as an attack department. Instead, he filled it as a discursive idea generator. The CDU must become younger, more feminine, more digital and more open, according to his mantra, which Norbert Röttgen is currently repeating almost word for word in the fight for the CDU chairmanship. After the refugee autumn 2015, Tauber stood firmly on the side of Angela Merkel – and within the party in the criticism.

The extensive Twitter user Tauber made himself extremely vulnerable in 2017 with a tweet about mini jobs. “If you’ve learned something decent, you don’t need three mini-jobs,” he said, wet research. He later had to apologize for this socially hypothermic announcement.

Modernization instead of attack

Many CDU conservatives also chalked Tauber about the lousy election result in 2017. A general secretary must attack the competition more than just want to modernize his own party, it said. In 2018 Tauber, who was critically ill at the time, no longer took up the position of Secretary General. Since then, he has been State Secretary in the Ministry of Defense and has largely disappeared from public debates.

However, he attracted attention after the murder of CDU politician Walter Lübcke. The party reacted noticeably cautious to the political murder by right-wing extremists. Tauber, however, accused the ex-CDU member of the Bundestag Erika Steinbach of promoting Lübcke’s murder through hate tweets. His idea of ​​depriving right-wing extremists and constitutional enemies, however, seemed a bit ill-conceived – a proposal that constitutional lawyers have given up on.

Now the Hessian is getting out of politics entirely, for “personal and family reasons”. His compromised health also played a role, and he also wanted to “look for new professional challenges”. In short – a withdrawal for private, not political reasons. And yet Tauber’s departure is a political symbol. With the Chancellor, a prominent representative of the liberal Merkel CDU will also leave the stage in 2021.


Bundestag remains big: GroKo enforces electoral reform

After years of dispute, the Bundestag decided to reform the electoral law. Unsuitable, so the opposition. Parts of the CDU also abstained.

A major reform, including a reduction in the number of constituencies, should not be available until the 2025 election Photo: ap

BERLIN dpa | After years of fruitless debates about downsizing the Bundestag, the grand coalition pushed through an electoral reform against the opposition. The FDP, the Left and the Greens strictly rejected the draft from the CDU / CSU and SPD on Thursday because, from their point of view, it is completely unsuitable for achieving the desired downsizing of the parliament, which has grown to 709 members. The coalition factions also broke with the tradition of adopting changes to the electoral law with a large majority if possible.

Bundestag President Wolfgang Schäuble and six other CDU MPs refused to approve the bill from their own ranks. Apparently out of disappointment with the regulations, which were also criticized by experts as largely ineffective, they abstained from voting. This is shown by the roll-call vote published by the Bundestag.

The First Parliamentary Managing Director of the Greens, Britta Haßelmann, said: “There will be no dampening effect.” Haßelmann spoke of “messing around”. The coalition “failed miserably,” she said. “The draft is objectively unsuitable for downsizing the Bundestag. It raises constitutional questions that are completely unanswered, ”said FDP domestic politician Konstantin Kuhle. The decisive lever, a reduction in the number of constituencies, is initially missing.

On the other hand, Philipp Amthor from the CDU emphasized: “We have found a fair, constitutional model.” Causes damage because it is effective, because it is binding, because it is understandable ”.

Experts criticize the GroKo reform

The coalition parliamentary groups’ bill was passed with 362 votes in favor, 281 against, with 8 abstentions. CDU / CSU and SPD together have 398 seats in the Bundestag. A joint bill by the FDP, the Greens and the Left did not find a majority, as did an AfD bill.

In the debate, the left-wing politician Friedrich Straetmanns pointed out that at a hearing in the Bundestag’s Interior Committee, six out of seven experts tore apart the bill. “After your electoral reforms and with the figures from all current surveys, the Bundestag will continue to grow significantly to over 800 members.”

Albrecht Glaser from the AfD said that he had not yet heard a “total dismantling” like in the hearing. The coalition had prevented any reform for three years. “And the piecemeal now nailed together is not a reform.”

The FDP, the Left, the Greens and the AfD were also able to feel confirmed by an opinion from the Bundestag’s scientific service that became known on Thursday. It certifies that the model of the CDU / CSU and SPD has little effect.

The standard size of Parliament is far exceeded

Based on the result of the 2017 Bundestag election, this would have made it possible to reduce the total number of seats to up to 682 MPs. The regulations would have “brought savings of up to 27 MPs”. In the current Bundestag there are 709 members, the standard size of the parliament is 598 seats.

According to the coalition draft, there should be 299 constituencies for the election in one year. Overhang mandates from a party should be partially offset against their list mandates. And if the regular variable of 598 seats is exceeded, up to three overhang mandates should not be compensated by compensatory mandates.

A major reform – then also with a reduction in the number of constituencies – should, according to the will of the coalition, only take place in the 2025 election. To this end, a reform commission made up of scientists, parliamentarians and other members is to be set up, which is to present a result no later than June 30, 2023.


Lindner, Merz and Discrimination: The Sexism In Us

Christian Lindner and Friedrich Merz knock old man’s sayings at the expense of women and homosexuals. They hope for an audience that will approve of such statements.

Grin, art break, totally unintentional. Simply old in thinking: Christian Lindner and Friedrich Merz Photo: David Charisins / dpa

It was a week of linguistic lapses. First Christian Lindner humiliated the general secretary Linda Teuteberg, who had been killed by him, at the FDP party congress with a sexist “joke”: he had started his day with Teuteberg 300 times, he said, took a break to catch laughter in the audience and then followed up : “I speak about our daily morning phone call about the political situation. Not what you think now. “

CDU man Friedrich Merz made a similar misstep when, when asked whether he could imagine a gay chancellor, he linked homosexuality with child abuse. Everything in 2020. Weren’t we already further?

The interesting thing is that both statements came across as surprisingly backward-looking, but at the same time so everyday and “heard a thousand times” – it was just everyday sexism and everyday homophobia par excellence. The fact that Lindner and Merz both felt misunderstood in retrospect is only an expression of their permanent self-infliction.

Nevertheless, it is too easy to dismiss Merz and Lindner as yesterday and to claim that the rest of society is already further. The degradation of others is a tried and tested means of maintaining power. It’s also like this: Friedrich Merz is running for the chairmanship of the CDU – and his polls are not too bad. And Lindner is still the FDP leader, even if his party is currently not soaring.

These men are not just from the present, they may also be men of the future. It is far from clear that these escapades necessarily lead to poor approval ratings. Considering the Trump principle, the opposite could also happen.

Progress is not necessarily linear; all social achievements can also be lost again

Lindner and Merz are both rhetorically trained and not new to politics. Both apparently assume that there is an audience that approves of such sayings. It is therefore not exaggerated to deal with these apparently only spoken words. The public can and should ask politicians not to discriminate against anyone with words.

“Anyone who wants Merz as their chancellor and Lindner as their deputy wants a rollback to the 1950s,” criticized SPD General Secretary Lars Klingbeil. But it is dangerous to locate the two men in a past that is long gone.

It was not 1950, but 2001, when Klaus Wowereit was the first top politician to openly address his homosexuality with his sentence “I am gay – and that’s a good thing!”. In 2005 Angela Merkel became the first woman to be elected to the Chancellery. Both moments were milestones in emancipation. But progress is not necessarily linear; all social achievements can also be lost again.

Narrowing the problem only to the two people Merz and Lindner or the CDU and the FDP obscures the view of the whole picture. The fact that today gay and lesbian politicians can act more naturally in political operations without having to cover up this part of their identity, and that women occupy ministerial posts does not mean that everyone lives non-discriminatory.

Despite legal achievements, sexism, homophobia and trans-hostility are still common – in all social milieus, in all parties. Anyone who claims otherwise is misunderstanding the reality of life for those affected.

There is also discrimination in left, progressive circles. Identifying Merz and Lindner as culprits can also serve to just make sure that you are on the right side. But perhaps this only reveals the discrepancy between modern social discourse and a society that is not as progressive as some would like it to be.


Union Berlin showed the way: football with spectators

PPresident Dirk Zingler didn’t really care about the sporting events. “I looked at the people who are in the stadium and I looked into those overjoyed eyes,” said the boss of the Berlin Bundesliga club 1. FC Union. “It was a very special moment to have people in the stadium after so many weeks and months, it was just wonderful,” said Zingler. Basically, all of Germany watched the Unioner’s last preparatory game before the start of the competitive game.

The hosts beat 1. FC Nürnberg 2-1 on Saturday with two goals from Marcus Ingvartsen (51st / 65th minute / penalty kick). In between, Nikola Dovedan (53rd) scored for the Nuremberg team. “It was great to play with fans again and get the real football feeling,” said Ingvartsen. “It gave me goose bumps, even when the stadium wasn’t full. It’s just good to have spectators in the stadium, ”said Union coach Urs Fischer.

The discussions are not over 14 days before the planned Bundesliga start: Bavaria’s Prime Minister Markus Söder and North Rhine-Westphalia’s state father Armin Laschet spoke of “distortion of competition” last week, as the spectator comeback is going very differently in each of the 16 federal states And Federal Health Minister Jens Spahn warned on Saturday: “A uniform approach would be better for acceptance.” That should now be in place by the end of October. Spahn just hopes “everyone is aware – both those who approve it and those who approve it who carry it out – that the risk of infection remains minimized. “

Praise from the health department

4500 fans were there, or better: were allowed to be there. Normally 22,012 spectators fit into the stadium “An der Alten Försterei”. The last time in front of fans was on March 1st against VfL Wolfsburg (2-2). Then came the lockdown because of the corona pandemic. For weeks now, the Unioners, led by Zingler, have been campaigning for the fans to return, even in times of Corona.

After the pilot game, there was even praise from the Berlin Health Department Treptow-Köpenick. “The 1. FC Union implemented the hygiene-relevant requirements excellently”, explained the responsible speaker – he too had been to the stadium. “I am particularly impressed by the fans, who accept the necessary measures and adhere to the hygiene rules.”

For Zingler it should only be the beginning on the way to a certain normality. Union has proven that “it can be done in the smallest Bundesliga stadium. I would like that at other Bundesliga locations where there is a lot more space, where hygiene measures are possible, that it would also be possible there, ”he said loudly“ Kicker ”.

Swipe at Max Eberl

Zingler does not mind that the actions of the Iron are also viewed critically by others. “I don’t expect support, I don’t want it either,” he said: “Most of the time, we are criticized by the people who do nothing themselves – except for cardboard comrades. That’s a little too little for me. “

Zingler put a swipe at Max Eberl, the sports director of Borussia Mönchengladbach, who had recently criticized the Union’s proposals to return to the stadiums. “I would be happy if we didn’t position ourselves all the time and want to look better than others,” Eberl complained.


Tonnies and the ban on work contracts: trust is not appropriate

The cabinet is finally breaking its line of trusting industry promises. Economic liberals are upset.

Slaughter on the assembly line: Tönnies employees, recently with corona protection Photo: Tönnies / dpa

The Food, Beverage and Catering Union (NGG) called Wednesday “historic”. But done. The cabinet has indeed approved the draft for a ban on contracts for work in the meat industry. But that’s still just a government decision. Minister of Labor Hubertus Heil’s draft law still has to be passed through parliament.

And according to what can be heard from the ranks of the Union, it is willing to make minced meat from the draft of the SPD minister. Because he wants temporary work on the collar in general, and above all the Union’s economic wing wants to prevent this in the beginning. It is therefore quite possible that the prohibition on contracts for work will be similar to that of the basic pension. It was a perennial favorite between the coalition partners.

Nevertheless, the cabinet decision breaks with the hitherto iron line of relying on declarations of commitment in dealing with the food industry. The Tönnies case in particular has shown how much trust you can put in the industry to voluntarily do something for the better, regardless of whether it concerns the environment, animal welfare or working conditions. Namely none. If there is trust in it, then not only laws are important, but also control.

German slaughterhouses have developed into scandalous places, not just as corona hotspots, they were previously for listeria and salmonella. Politicians must therefore ensure that their regulations are checked effectively. In terms of the environment, animal welfare and working conditions. A look at Heil’s design reveals what is flourishing in the meat industry. It only provides for controls from 2026 and then only in 5 percent of the plants annually, i.e. once every 20 years per slaughterhouse.

This is too little. Unless trade and food control is also improved, what it decides will give politicians the same problems as industry with its beautiful declarations of intent. You don’t believe her anymore.


Crisis winner Markus Söder: From state chancellery to chancellery

Does Markus Söder want to become a candidate for chancellor? In the Union, some think that is possible.

Can crisis – but does he want chancellor too? Photo: Sven Hoppe / dpa

BERLIN taz | That will give really nice pictures. And also plenty of room for speculation. The Chancellor is coming to Herrenchiemsee this Tuesday. Actually, to put the Bavarian cabinet meeting there in the picture about its agenda for the German EU Council Presidency. In fact, the meeting with Bavarian Prime Minister Markus Söder (CSU) opens up a lot of room for speculation.

The 53-year-old has been under close scrutiny since Söder gently indicated in an interview a week ago that he might be targeting the chancellor’s candidacy. The Daily mirror he had said: “Only those who master crises, who can do the duty, can also shine in the freestyle.” In the meantime, since in a survey for ZDF two thirds of those surveyed believe that he is capable of being chancellor, the pressure is growing. Every sentence wants to be weighed, every gesture, every twitch of the corner of his mouth could be a sign. As it is in the summer break.

In the Union, also in the CDU, there are more and more voices that Markus Söder believes in the Chancellery. Nobody wants to be quoted. After all, there are already three candidates for the CDU chair. The mere fact that Friedrich Merz is satisfied with an office in the Konrad-Adenauer-Haus and Markus Söder in the Chancellery seems strange. The Sauerlander wants the whole cake – not just one piece.

In addition, a permanent debate about Soder’s advantages and disadvantages can lead to fatigue and ultimately to the political dismantling of the candidate. CSU regional group leader Alexander Dobrindt puts it this way to Deutschlandfunk: “I advise our parties not to conduct this debate as actively now.” This does not lead to more approval. It is currently more important how politics in the Corona crisis deals with issues such as insufficient economic growth and rising unemployment.

Söder’s omnipresence makes it difficult for the CDU candidates

“The question of the timing of a candidate selection is less important than the unity with which the CDU and CSU stand behind a joint candidate,” said Dobrindt, referring to the question of when the two sister parties should best decide on the joint candidate for chancellor. “It’s all about this. And you have to achieve that. “

In view of Söder’s omnipresence in the media, the three candidates for the CDU chairmanship must see how they convince the delegates of the party congress in December. North Rhine-Westphalia’s Prime Minister Armin Laschet, according to the current ZDF Politbarometer, think that just 19 percent of those surveyed are suitable candidates for Chancellor. The lawyer Friedrich Merz gets 31 percent of the votes, while the foreign politician Norbert Röttgen only gets 14 percent.

It is also questionable how Markus Söder should become candidate for chancellor of the Union without plunging the big sister party into a tangible crisis. It is a question of self-respect that the delegates at the CDU party conference elect a new chairman, whom they do not see as a candidate for chancellor. Whether Merz, Röttgen or Laschet (or instead of his Jens Spahn) – no CDU candidate would convince the delegates without claiming to be chancellor.

Should it come to the point where the CSU boss feels he is called to higher, logistical provisions are made. The CSU party conference was just scheduled for December 12 in Söder’s hometown Nuremberg, shortly after that of the sister party. That would also give nice pictures.


50 years of the Volkswagen K 70

Sa dress was decidedly simple, but with its inner values ​​the VW K 70 turned the Wolfsburg technology credo upside down fifty years ago. With front-wheel drive and a water-cooled four-cylinder in-line above the front axle, he drove a tough collision course against the long-established three-sentence rule that said: Volkswagen is the same as the rear engine, air cooling and rear-wheel drive. With its start of production in September 1970, the K 70 made a name for itself as an almost forgotten pioneer, who initiated the final move away from the beetle monoculture that had been cultivated for decades.

Curiously, his designers were not in Wolfsburg, but in Neckarsulm. At NSU engine factories, development work for a mid-range car had already begun in January 1965, which was to close the gap between the Prinz 4 small car and the Ro 80 Wankel engine icon, which is located in the upper class segment. The finished prototype of the NSU K 70 – the “K” was used for the piston engine at the factory – was to celebrate its premiere at the Geneva Motor Show in March 1969, but this did not happen due to the impending merger of the Volkswagen subsidiary Auto Union GmbH with NSU. It was only a year and a half later, in autumn 1970, that the four-door car, now ennobled to the VW K 70, came onto the market. After all, the Wolfsburg-based company paid its new subsidiary Audi NSU Auto-Union AG 33 Marks per vehicle for the Foundel child that fell to them as compensation for development costs and investments in production facilities.

The body was designed by the NSU design chief Claus Luthe (1932-2008), who later made a career at Audi and BMW. He had previously dressed the Ro 80. The 4.42-meter-long notchback sedan of the K 70 impressed with its harmonious proportions and large window areas, which enabled perfect all-round visibility, true to the principle of “form follows function”, which seems to have gotten under the wheels of many modern models. One weak point was the poor drag coefficient of 0.52, which made the K 70 a drinker. At that time, several specialist magazines determined average consumption between 11.3 and 14.1 liters of premium gasoline during test drives.

VW 412 and VW K 70

Photo gallery

Under the self-supporting all-steel body was an advanced chassis, consisting of McPherson struts and wishbones at the front and a semi-trailing arm axle with a subframe at the rear. In order to reduce the unsprung masses, the front disc brakes, similar to those in the Ro 80 or in various Citroen models, were located on the differential housing – a horror for every mechanic when changing the pads. As a consolation, the clutch disc could be changed without removing the engine or transmission. Passive safety was a top priority in the K 70: it already had a split and angled steering column, crumple zones at the bow and stern, and a reinforced safety passenger cell.

The 1.6-liter short-stroke engine with overhead camshaft initially produced 90 hp at 5200 rpm, a short time later there was also an engine with 75 hp, which, thanks to its lower compression, also tolerated regular petrol, was a not unimportant sales argument at the time. From May 1973 onwards, the K 70 LS version was replaced by an engine drilled out to 1.8 liters to replace the 90 hp version. It now delivered 100 hp and accelerated the almost 1100 kilogram four-door car from 0 to 100 km / h in 13 seconds. The top speed rose slightly from 158 to 162 km / h.

The K 70 was built in the purpose-built Volkswagen plant in Salzgitter. After a good four years, its production ended again in early 1975. By then, 211 127 copies had left the assembly line, an originally planned combination version was never realized. Although he can be rated as a technical pioneer for the Golf and Passat models, he took on the role of the unpopular stepchild in the Volkswagen Group. This is still reflected today in the low price level for youngtimers: Even a well-preserved K 70 in condition 2, at around 8,000 euros, hardly costs more than the weakly motorized basic model of the first Golf generation.


Dispute over electoral law reform: tragedy of the Union

The Bundestag should become smaller. But instead of deciding on a solution that corresponds to the will of the voters: the CDU and CSU are tricking themselves.

Corona test run with notes: Whose costs will the seats be reduced in the near future? Photo: Stefan Boness / Ipon / imago

Hosianna, CDU and CSU have agreed on an electoral reform! So far, the Union has tried to put the uncomfortable topic on the back burner. Now, on Friday evening, after hours of discussion, she still seems to have decided not to continue blocking. Obviously, the pressure from the Greens, the FDP and the Left Party, which have long put forward a joint proposal, worked. That is gratifying for now.

All parties represented in the Bundestag agree that the Bundestag has become too large due to overhang and compensation mandates. With its 709 MPs, it is currently well above its regular size of 598 seats. After the next election, it could even grow to more than 800 MPs. The exciting question is, however, at whose expense will Parliament be reduced. This is exactly what the political dispute is about.

The electoral law reform is not an issue with which an election can be won. The matter seems too dry, too bureaucratic for that. But it is eminently political: depending on which variant the Bundestag chooses, this can be decisive for the outcome of an election. Because a voter: a majority does not necessarily lead to a majority of mandates. In the case of a scarce result, dealing with overhang mandates can be decisive.

Actually, there should be a basic consensus, at least among the democratic parties, that the composition of the Bundestag has to correspond as precisely as possible to the voters: inner will. This manifests itself in a personalized proportional representation such as the German in the second votes.

This means that the direct mandates awarded by majority vote must not lead to a gross distortion, which is why overhang mandates must be compensated for. The consequence is that if you want to downsize the Bundestag, you have to reduce the direct electoral districts so that there are as few, ideally no, overhang mandates.

After the CSU had long refused any constructive solution, it has now agreed on a half-baked variant with its sister party

The pragmatic and practical proposal from the Greens, the FDP and the Left Party is aimed precisely at this. According to this, the Bundestag would on the one hand be increased to a target size of 630 deputies and on the other hand the constituencies would be reduced from 299 to 250. Their joint bill has already passed the first reading and could easily be passed by the Bundestag on Friday. Unfortunately he won’t. Because Union and SPD prevented this on Wednesday morning in the interior committee because of supposedly further need for advice.

The reason is simple: Above all, the Union, but also the SPD, benefit from the overhang mandates. Accordingly, they have no pronounced interest in reducing the constituency. Let’s take the example of the CSU: it won all 46 constituencies in Bavaria directly in the 2017 federal election – with a second vote result of 38.8 percent, according to which the party was actually only entitled to 39 seats. So far, all of the CSU’s “ideas” have focused exclusively on not changing this imbalance.

After the CSU had long refused any constructive solution, it has now agreed on a half-baked variant with its sister party. This provides for a ridiculous reduction in the number of constituencies to 280, with only two in Bavaria being eliminated. In addition, up to seven overhang mandates are no longer to be compensated, which would amount to a distortion of the voter: internal vote in favor of the Union as well as a disadvantage for the other parties.

This would not solve the basic problem of the oversized Bundestag. It is also still open whether it is a really serious proposal at all. Because it is unclear whether it can still be implemented until the Bundestag election next year – and whether the Union wants it at all. There is much to suggest that the SPD only wants to push the buck.

It is a tragedy, which the CDU and the CSU perform because of transparent party-gothic motives. The question is whether the SPD falls for it. Your MPs have an alternative. Greens, FDP and Left Party have presented them. The social democrats: all they had to do was have the self-confidence to help their bill to get a majority. It is a pity that this is unfortunately not to be expected.


Climate protection and sustainability in Europe: Green deal on black terms

Commissioner von der Leyen and Chancellor Merkel want stricter climate targets. But CDU / CSU undermine the plan with many exceptions.

The heart of the Green Deal is an EU climate law with a new emissions target Photo: dpa

BERLIN taz | The CDU / CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag has formulated the conditions under which it supports the “Green Deal” of the EU Commission: According to this, there should only be more climate protection and sustainability if Germany is among other things responsible for future CO2nd-Saving savings.

In addition, the EU should forego a climate law, do not tighten the rules for the chemical, automotive and agricultural industries, for example, and expand European emissions trading. These are the key points of a position paper that the parliamentary group adopted in Berlin on Tuesday evening.

The 13-page concept “For a Green Deal – Combining climate protection and sustainable development with economic recovery, competitiveness, social balance and stability” was developed by the Vice-Heads of the Katja Leikert Group (responsible for Europe), Carsten Linnemann (Business), Andreas Jung ( Finance) and Georg Nüßlein (environment). It is intended to serve as “guidance” for the government, says Nüßlein.

The largest faction of the largest EU country is thus drawing up how the green deal of her party friend, EU Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, is to continue. At the end of 2019, it presented a series of plans and projects for more climate protection and sustainability in the EU. These include a green industrial policy, efficiency gains, more renewable and ecological progress in transport, agriculture and finance.

The fear: minus 68 percent by 2030 as a German target

The key point of the Green Deal is an EU climate law with a new climate target. According to the Paris Agreement, this is currently said to be minus 40 percent CO2nd to be tightened to minus 50 to 55 percent in 2030. Chancellor Angela Merkel officially welcomed this idea two weeks ago as a guideline for the German EU Council Presidency in the second half of the year – without conditions.

If the old calculation patterns, according to which rich countries achieve more than poor, remain unchanged, an EU target of 55 percent would mean that Germany would have to perform around 68 percent less in 2030, the Union warns – instead of the minus 55 percent that Germany is targeting nationally stipulated in the climate protection law.

Opposition to this was raised in the parliamentary group. A higher climate target without changes to the EU burden sharing for CO2nd-Reduction “we reject”, it said in the first version of the position paper that circulated last week.

This wording has now been formally deleted, but the content has been retained. Now it is said that the new requirement “would be a far-reaching target tightening” and an “enormous challenge”. However, the Union does not want to know anything about a directional dispute. “I don’t see any dissent about the Chancellor,” said Nüßlein.

However, the chancellor’s paper sets narrow limits for the forthcoming negotiations, which she will conduct as EU Council President with the other EU countries, the Parliament and the Commission from July. The Union faction wants other countries to do more to “share the burden” in climate protection. So far, these contributions have been calculated according to economic power. According to the Union’s ideas, Germany should now receive a bonus for its energy transition.

Also in the catalog of demands: extend EU emissions trading to buildings and traffic and allow aid for climate projects beyond the EU, for example in the rainforest, to be counted towards climate protection efforts.

Funds for agricultural policy should flow as before

“We support the Paris Agreement, Ursula von der Leyen and the Chancellor in the climate goals,” said Andreas Jung. This support sounds in the position paper as follows: “We reject the EU Commission’s proposal to independently set EU climate targets through delegated acts”.

In addition, there are no stricter requirements for automakers for CO until 20302nd; no stricter rules for the chemical industry or the use of pesticides, counting European forests as CO2ndStorage, cheaper electricity for industrial companies. “Purpose and effect of regulatory instruments” should be questioned, complaints against construction projects become more difficult. However, the EU funds for agricultural policy, which are sometimes harmful to the climate, should flow as before.

SPD defends the chancellor

The concept does not answer whether and how quickly all these requirements can be implemented with the other 26 EU countries. Such an agreement, for example on “burden sharing” or emissions trading, has often taken years in the past.

And the coalition partner is also not convinced. The Union must “clarify quickly whether it stands behind the Federal Chancellor or wants to slow down ambitious climate protection,” SPD Vice-Group leader Matthias Miersch took the CDU Chancellor and the CDU-EU Commission boss under protection against the CDU / CSU parliamentary group.