Red-red reindeer at Anne Will
Germany's parties are ringing the federal election campaign - and obviously want to go to the electorate with the pension. The impression left not only the summit of the Grand Coalition last Thursday, but also Anne Wills Talk on the topic "pension reforms instead of reform - is the government already retired?" At the same time, Minister of Labor Andrea Nahles and left-wing party leader Dietmar Bartsch gave themselves a red-red battle.
Dietmar Bartsch (Die Linke), Group Chairman in the Bundestag
Carsten Linnemann (CDU), chairman of the CDU / CSU middle class and economic union
Elisabeth Niejahr, Capital Correspondent "Die Zeit"
But the removal of the Union stepped up much of the planned reform. The only agreement was to settle the pensions in East and West by 2025, and also to improve their employment retirement and working pensions. Is this sufficient to protect Germany's pensioners from poverty, to ensure their livelihood, and to ensure a sustainable and fair financing of old-age provision? At least Nahles wanted to achieve this with her advance.
Anne Will gave their guests quickly the march direction: You wanted to know if instead of the planned pension reform only a tinkering had come out - and whether the pension is so sure that Germany could afford it.
The vague statement of the minister left the audience helpless and brought Dietmar Bartsch to the palm. This is a poor testimony to the coalition that "something" should be clarified beforehand, he rebelled. "But you know it all yourself, Frau Nahles, I'm not saying anything more," was his conclusion. Hostess Will had little to add.
The guests
Andrea Nahles (SPD), Federal Minister for Labor and Social AffairsDietmar Bartsch (Die Linke), Group Chairman in the Bundestag
Carsten Linnemann (CDU), chairman of the CDU / CSU middle class and economic union
Elisabeth Niejahr, Capital Correspondent "Die Zeit"
 |
| Left-politician Dietmar Bartsch in the talk-round of Anne Will. |
Core of the broadcast
Andrea Nahles has just had to put in a tough blow. At the summit of the Grand Coalition on Thursday, the Union stole the new pension concept of the Labor Minister. A fundamental requirement is was a "double stop line": The pension level is currently around 48 percent should not fall below 46 percent by 2045, the contribution rate does not exceed 25 percent, called Nahles.But the removal of the Union stepped up much of the planned reform. The only agreement was to settle the pensions in East and West by 2025, and also to improve their employment retirement and working pensions. Is this sufficient to protect Germany's pensioners from poverty, to ensure their livelihood, and to ensure a sustainable and fair financing of old-age provision? At least Nahles wanted to achieve this with her advance.
Anne Will gave their guests quickly the march direction: You wanted to know if instead of the planned pension reform only a tinkering had come out - and whether the pension is so sure that Germany could afford it.
The fronts
Right from the start, Will felt the minister's teeth - and gave Nahles the opportunity to vehemently defend her original reformation. The disappointment of the fact that the Union had made a dash of its own was a clear indication to the Minister. And understandably, because the stimulus to the lower limit for the pension level came, for example, from CSU boss Horst Seehofer. Why then the veto? Seehofer simply avoided the costs, Nahles accused the Bavarian Prime Minister.
The SPD politician also did not allow herself to be diverted from the course when Will complained that she could not guarantee anything to younger citizens beyond 2045. According to the minister, a plan for the planning of a "halfway rational" economic forecast for more than 30 years is not possible at all until 2060. Her argument was understandable.
As expected, Carsten Linnemann opposed it. The CDU man accused Nahles of having presented a dubious concept: one could not spend tax breaks that were not available. In the clinch with the Minister, however, he drew the shortest. Where the pension level was supposed to land, Nahles challenged the economists. The argued weakly, if the pension level sinks, would not mean that the pensions would sink at the same time. That Linnemann was not able to score points, Linnemann seemed self-assured. But his attempt to divert the debate into the direction of officials' pensions, which were put to the test, did not work.
Schwimmer in the round brought Dietmar Bartsch, who made for an increase in the pension level to 50 percent and a state minimum restraint. The danger of poverty in old age is a development which is absurd in the face of "bubbling tax revenues." The chairman of the left-wing group reproached linientreu for the unjust distribution of his property: "There is obscene wealth in this country, we have to talk about, then we have neither childhood nor age poverty." Unfortunately, Bartsch left it with pithy speeches - presumably because he had no ultimate solution for the extremely complex German pension problem.
The SPD politician also did not allow herself to be diverted from the course when Will complained that she could not guarantee anything to younger citizens beyond 2045. According to the minister, a plan for the planning of a "halfway rational" economic forecast for more than 30 years is not possible at all until 2060. Her argument was understandable.
As expected, Carsten Linnemann opposed it. The CDU man accused Nahles of having presented a dubious concept: one could not spend tax breaks that were not available. In the clinch with the Minister, however, he drew the shortest. Where the pension level was supposed to land, Nahles challenged the economists. The argued weakly, if the pension level sinks, would not mean that the pensions would sink at the same time. That Linnemann was not able to score points, Linnemann seemed self-assured. But his attempt to divert the debate into the direction of officials' pensions, which were put to the test, did not work.
Schwimmer in the round brought Dietmar Bartsch, who made for an increase in the pension level to 50 percent and a state minimum restraint. The danger of poverty in old age is a development which is absurd in the face of "bubbling tax revenues." The chairman of the left-wing group reproached linientreu for the unjust distribution of his property: "There is obscene wealth in this country, we have to talk about, then we have neither childhood nor age poverty." Unfortunately, Bartsch left it with pithy speeches - presumably because he had no ultimate solution for the extremely complex German pension problem.
Fact of the evening
The Capital Correspondent of "Time" drove a pleasingly unpopular line beyond partial interests. Elisabeth Niejahr simply told politics to lure voters with the horror of old-age poverty. It is not age poverty that is the greatest social problem, but child poverty, said the economist. A justified objection: In Germany, three per cent of pensioners are currently affected by poverty, but almost 15 per cent of children.Excitement of the show
Andrea Nahles, who could not tell why exactly the Union had tipped the concept, had to make sure that the presenter, the guests and the spectators were in for a moment. She did not receive a reason for the removal, the minister explained: "Sometimes they do not tell me anything." A hardly acceptable type of non-communication between the government parties, which would not help win electoral districts. This clearly indicates that the coalition partners have opened the election campaign.Highlight of the evening
At least once Will pounded heavily on the bush: How should the agreed pensions be paid in East and West? Already at the press conference on the Rentengipfel there were different statements. While the Ministry of Finance pleaded for funding from funding, the spokeswoman of the Ministry of Labor announced that they wanted to use tax credits. Andrea Nahles unfortunately brought no light into the dark. She would clarify this with Wolfgang Schäuble, she admitted several times.The vague statement of the minister left the audience helpless and brought Dietmar Bartsch to the palm. This is a poor testimony to the coalition that "something" should be clarified beforehand, he rebelled. "But you know it all yourself, Frau Nahles, I'm not saying anything more," was his conclusion. Hostess Will had little to add.
What remained open
The round was the only thing that had to be done to prevent a future pension deficit - especially as in the coming years the farewell of the baby boomeries from the labor market to retirement will intensify the imbalance between pensioners and recipients. Certainly, there is enough material for further discussions on the subject - then with a hope that is less clear.Share This:
No Comment to " Red-red reindeer at Anne Will "