Look at you argue again
Ampel-Zoff Reloaded: Lindner and Esken at Maischberger
This audio version was artificially generated. More information
Somehow you had almost missed the traffic light dispute over the past three years. On Tuesday evening, the party bosses of the SPD and FDP, Saskia Esken and Christian Lindner at Maischberger will prove: they can still. A touch of relief spreads.
Their parties ruled and fought together for three years. Now you could soon be part of a government coalition: Saskia Esken, co-chair of the SPD, and FDP boss Christian Lindner. On Tuesday evening they are guests at Sandra Maischberger. And there they already give a foretaste of what the voters could expect after the election: they argue. And somehow they even seem to be a little fun. Esken and Lindner have not spoken to each other since the breakdown of the traffic light coalition, they tell in unison. Did you even miss the dispute?
After all, the two even agree at the beginning of the discussion: their own parties were not to blame at the end of the traffic lights, which was clear. Esken sees Lindner and the FDP in the responsibility, who pushes everything on the Greens, where a clarification of the migration question has failed. Lindner does not want to talk about trust between the SPD and its party. On the situation after the elections, he says: “I would like to be the best thing that there would be a federal government without left -wing parties.” Esken too does not want to comment on mutual trust, the coalition question of the election does not yet arise. One will speak to all parties except with the AfD, says Esken.
But what does the trust look like? Sandra Maischberger specifically asks why one should still pronounce the trust in the coming Sunday that is shared for the break of the traffic light coalition. Esken explains that the coalition would have liked to end because Germany's stability would have been necessary. That doesn't answer the question, but Esken doesn't want to say more about it. Lindner becomes something more specific: “Anyone who gives up a highest state office or is ready to be released because of their own political beliefs, I think they have proven that it is serious with his beliefs. I could still be finance minister, but I would have lost my self -confidence with everything that is connected and I would have harmed the country because the old government was unable to act appropriately.” Lindner does not mention that there was an FDP paper that describes a scenario for a traffic light long before the traffic light end. It is clear to him: In any case, the FDP was not to blame for the breach of government.
The question of the money
Whoever puts the new government will be confronted with new facts. It has been clear since last weekend: the United States will no longer be the reliable alliance partner as before. Germany has to do more financially – for its own, European and probably also Ukrainian security. High costs will have to be made. How, “this is a very large and important question that has to be answered all late in 2028,” says Esken. Then the special fund runs out for Germany's defense ability. However, Esken does not have any real answers here either. In any case, she doesn't want to shorten the pensions. But: “We have to reform the debt brake for this task to raise the ability to defend.”
Lindner has concrete suggestions: “permanent, for years and decades with growing public debt, would not be sustainable. You can do that over a short period of time. In the past, according to Lindner, the state also borne its defense costs. “But without debt brake,” Esken throws. Lindner explains why this was the case in his opinion: “At that time we had a state that concentrated very much on its core tasks. Today our state is bogged down. He bureaucrates. It costs a lot of money. The state apparatus has grown almost uncontrollably.” Lindner demands: “Slimish the state apparatus, make the welfare state more accurate, so that the lack of drive, for example, is not tolerated in the case of citizenship money, limit the consequences of the irregular migration and the costs in the welfare state, and since everything is now changing, we also have to change Ground decisions.”
If Germany would only be climate-neutral in 2050 like all other EU countries instead of five years earlier, it could save 750 billion euros, says Lindner-and relies on expert reports. “With a different form of expenses, we have the means not only to strengthen security, but also to modernize education and infrastructure.”
Esken replies: “I want to say very clearly that at least with me as a SPD party chairman there is definitely no policy that shaves the welfare state in this country, who looks down again on people who try to manage their lives every day, and certainly not a policy that, according to the tax concepts of the CDU, FDP and the AfD, will benefit the richest in this country. That is completely clear. “
The Federal Republic has to become competitive again, says Lindner. Therefore, the FDP wants to relieve the middle class. Esken is completely different: the FDP wants to relieve the richest people with tax gifts.
So that doesn't look like an agreement at first. But there is also good news: Esken and Lindner Duken, call each other in the first name. So a compromise may seem possible.
