[ad_1]
WORLD: Mr. Weil, what has bothered you the most this week: the current disagreement between countries in the fight against the pandemic? Or about the indiscretions that once again leaked to the public during the conference between the Prime Ministers and the Chancellor?
Stephan Weil: The last. In view of the situation, I consider it completely inappropriate for anything and everything from that conference to be broadcast to the outside world. It should be possible to speak openly, clearly and confidentially in such a group. If every word is tapped, it won’t work.
WORLD: He referred to the round participant (s) who submitted quotes or information to the media as “full posts.” A rather harsh tone for a round in which the country’s political elites have gathered.
Why: It may be, but in my opinion it is also quite a serious process. We are currently discussing very serious issues that are of great importance to our society.
WORLD: Are you suspicious of someone?
Why: No. At the end of the day, I don’t care who it was either. What matters to me is the damage these meetings cause by this disregard for confidentiality.
WORLD: One whose name is always mentioned in these cases is Jens Spahn. Why? Do you constantly talk on the phone at those meetings?
Why: In fact, we are all constantly active with our mobile phones. That is why I think that in such important meetings all participants could be asked to leave their cell phones outside. In any case, it makes little sense to meet for eight hours in a tap-proof room in the Chancellery if there is regular communication with the outside world at the same time.
Lower Saxony Head of Government Stephan Weil (SPD): “Next time we should refrain from holding an image of disagreement externally”
Source: Bertold Walker
WORLD: At the end of the meeting, Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) was notably disappointed with the results. Do you share this disappointment?
Why: No. The motion for a resolution that the Federal Government sent us on our way to Berlin does not differ significantly from the resolutions we took then at the Chancellery. In this sense, the criticism that was expressed in hindsight is not understandable to me.
WORLD: After meeting with the prime minister, Merkel advised people to do more to combat the pandemic than state governments tell them to do. Do you perceive this as an admissible criticism or is it that, compared to the customs between the federal and state governments, is it already excessive?
Why: Take the example of the curfew. We discussed whether such a curfew should be mandatory from an incidence value of 35, or whether it should be recommended. In reality, this is not a fundamental conflict.
However, 48 hours later, the Administrative Court of Berlin even granted a curfew for the federal capital, even though the incidence value in Berlin is well above 50! That’s a real problem then, I think. So next time we better refrain from holding an external image of disagreement if there is no real reason for it.
“This is absolute gossip for the Berlin Senate”
The Berlin administrative court has revoked the curfew. Eleven bars that had sued the measure can temporarily reopen at night. WELT reporter Daniel Koop reports on the current situation in the capital.
WORLD: Do you consider that curfew is an appropriate means to combat a pandemic?
Why: Yes. Like all other outcomes of the Berlin conference, we will implement the point-by-point curfew in Lower Saxony and, in case of doubt, we will initiate the necessary legal procedures. From my point of view, it is a sufficiently confirmed experience that alcohol late at night significantly increases the risk of infection in social gatherings.
The curfew is a much softer means than closing restaurants and bars. We don’t want them. And I hope that in the end we will not be forced to make exactly these closures.
WORLD: The accommodation ban is already off the table in most countries, also due to court rulings. Is that a problem for you?
Why: From the beginning I was very aware of the double-edged nature of this measure. We only chose it because most other tourist countries had introduced these measures and we did not want Lower Saxony to become an alternative destination for tourists from polluted areas.
Now we will mainly talk with the municipalities of our tourist regions about how we can avoid precisely that in view of the current jurisprudence. In the meantime, however, several countries have said goodbye to the accommodation ban, so the situation is again different.
“You should always try the mildest remedy first”
Source: Bertold Walker
WORLD: Schleswig-Holstein and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania now advocate that in the future, travel from risk areas in the interior of Germany be more restricted. Was that a path they would go down?
Why: If you have to choose between two restriction options, it can really only be the softer medium. For me, that would certainly be more of an accommodation ban than an exit ban. This week, however, we have already had several court decisions that require very precise tests of the effectiveness of each protection measure against infections. That will cause us problems. We are currently trying to ensure protection against infection with the most gentle but consistent measures.
Naturally, gentle measures only achieve manageable effects. However, if that leads to these measures being picked up by the courts for precisely this manageable effect, we automatically end up with tougher measures. Of course, they also have a stronger effect, including much greater side effects.
Based on my understanding of proportionality, softer means should always be tried first, in other words: better curfew than closed bars and restaurants.
Each federal state cooks its own soup
The federal-state summit was supposed to bring clarity, but the federal states cannot yet agree on uniform rules. Chancellor Angela Merkel now called on citizens to adhere to the stricter measures.
Source: WELT / Peter Haentjes
WORLD: Hamburg has lowered the limit for participants in private celebrations to 15. Is Lower Saxony moving with you?
Why: Yes, we will also lower it according to the appointments made last week.
WORLD: Christmas markets are likely to be canceled in view of the rapidly increasing number of infections, right?
Why: It is understandable, but not really feasible, that the many organizers who have been affected by the Corona crisis want to be sure of planning now. Basically, we want to enable Christmas markets with proper hygiene concepts.
However, in the end, it all depends on the number of infections we have in December, and therefore on the understanding and prudence of our citizens. We must not fool ourselves. Even the toughest measures will fail if the population is unwilling to restrict contacts on its own initiative and to act with caution.
WORLD: Do you really have an explanation for the sharp increase in the number of infections these days?
Why: We understand that this increase is mainly due to private meetings. There are also special sources of risk. In western Lower Saxony, for example, these are the slaughterhouses. The risk of spread in nursing homes and nursing homes remains high once the virus has penetrated such a facility.
WORLD: How, for example, are there exponential increases like in the city of Delmenhorst, where the incidence is now 170?
Why: There is a fairly diffuse infection process there, which makes containment difficult. On the one hand, we are close to Bremen with its highest infection rates. And also certain gatherings are susceptible to the spread of the virus.
WORLD: In Berlin, this applies in particular to large wedding celebrations for families with a migrant background. Are you also observing this in Lower Saxony?
Why: There is that here too. Events with different religious backgrounds also repeatedly trigger major infections. We are currently experiencing this in Lower Saxony, for example, with a Christian faith center in Bad Gandersheim, in which, despite a hygiene concept, more than 120 people were infected because they were probably singing vigorously. Basically, the more people, the greater the risk.
WORLD: Could it be that the local authorities are not paying enough attention to these same occasions?
Why: Fortunately, we live in a state where there is not a police officer behind every bush. Youth parties or larger family gatherings do not have to register. We have reached our limits, but we also need the support of the population.
You should talk to people without a mask or signal critical meetings to the authorities, because at this moment we are facing a situation that is a lot.
