[ad_1]
Neither the Bundestag nor the parliaments of the federal states play an important role in the fight against the pandemic. Instead, the rounds of the country’s leaders set the Chancellor’s pace. This is drawing more and more criticism.
By Kai Küstner, ARD capital studio
Basically, there are two debates that run in parallel when evaluating anti-crown measures. Both have to do with control and its loss: Has the pandemic incapacitated our parliaments? The only debate revolves around this specific question. The other debate is: Is the Chancellor in danger of losing control in the fight against Corona?
Angela Merkel, for example, failed to meet with the country’s leaders five days ago in an attempt to enforce a stricter anti-epidemic line. Brandenburg SPD Prime Minister Dietmar Woidke also expressed dissatisfaction afterwards: “I would have liked to take stricter measures. The signal that came from the meeting is a signal of disagreement. I think it is very problematic.”
The most difficult phase of the pandemic in Germany is facing, Woidke said in a joint statement. Morning magazine ARD and ZDF.
“Our kitchen burned in the spring”
Epidemiologists like Dirk Brockmann of the Robert Koch Institute confirm this: “I always compare it to a fire. Our kitchen burned in the spring. We went fast and extinguished ourselves. In the summer there was a fire without a flame. And now we have the situation that the first flames return and spread “.
But how exactly the extinguishing process should go and what bodies of water you need to contain the fire again is now a matter of controversy. One should “not over-dramatize,” FDP leader Christian Lindner said in Berlin report.
Pass doesn’t work
Because Merkel could not impose herself on the heads of country, the chancellor was forced to address the population directly: “I ask you to refrain from any travel that is not really necessary,” was her appeal. It is clear that Merkel cannot govern in the way she would like in light of the pandemic.
At the same time, however, more and more politicians are complaining that basically only one of the three powers of the state has been controlling destiny with the help of ordinances for months: the executive. That means: federal and state governments, beyond parliaments.
The opposition demands more voice
According to the historian of the Free University of Berlin, Paul Nolte, a “dictatorship of the Crown” had not been established and there was no plan. “But it is a creeping poison: the policy of regulation from above, the Prime Minister’s rounds rather than the decisions of parliaments and the debates that take place there. We have to get back to that more forcefully,” Nolte warned. WDR.
The Greens, the FDP, the Left Party – all are calling out loud for important bills to be presented to parliaments. Even if you sometimes need more time.
“Democracy saves undesirable developments”
“Democracy costs a lot of time, but it also saves undesirable developments,” said left-wing party leader Katja Kipping in WDR. Many decisions are now the responsibility of the federal states. But even there it must be discussed to what extent parliaments would be more involved. Kipping said it wouldn’t save a lot of money to impose housing bans that would later be reimbursed by the courts.
Who should be in control of containing this pandemic and by what means? This debate has just begun.
