CDU Vice CARSTEN LINNEMANN
"Robert Habeck is jeopardizing our industrial backbone"
Carsten Linnemann has written a new book in which he self-critically dissects the shortcomings of the political establishment. In an interview with Benny White, the chairman of the CDU policy commission talks about politicians without professional training, Economics Minister Robert Habeck's ideology-driven crisis management and explains why his party rejects citizens' income.
Carsten Linnemann is deputy leader of the CDU and chairman of the principle committee. Until 2021, Linnemann was chairman of the SME and Economic Union of the CDU. In the last federal election, he won the direct mandate in the constituency of Paderborn.
Mr. Linnemann, the title of your new book "They don't tick right!" picks up on the great disenchantment with politics in the population. Is politics also partly to blame for this development?
Yes, politics is largely to blame for disenchantment with politics. For years, indispensable reforms in politics have simply been missed. Everyone sees that the healthcare system is about to collapse and the pension system is eroding. Politicians must therefore not only act in crisis mode, but must finally tackle difficult challenges that have been becoming more and more urgent for years. But if we want to achieve acceptance for this, we should start with self-criticism.
What do you mean by that?
Political reforms are urgently needed. In my book, I make concrete suggestions, starting with downsizing the German Bundestag and the bloated ministries. Limiting the term of office of the Chancellor and abolishing pensions for members of the Bundestag should also be considered. If we implement a few of these things, we will reduce disenchantment with politics and trim this country for the future.
You were already successful as an economist before you entered the Bundestag and can imagine a life outside of politics. Do you belong to a minority in politics?
I hope that no Member of Parliament is glued to his chair and able to stand on his own two feet professionally when it comes down to it. Because if he can do that, he has a completely different independence and also says what he thinks. Therefore, this should be a basic requirement for every elected politician. I also understand any citizen who says that a person without professional experience cannot have a realistic view of what the reality on the ground is like.
Let's focus on your party. The CDU introduced a women's quota at its last party conference. Is the CDU still a credible conservative party?
The CDU is a conservative force. We can see that from the fact that we have not only complied with the debt brake in recent years, but have also implemented the black zero. No other party in the German Bundestag could have done that. Therefore, the CDU is and will remain a conservative party. With regard to the women's quota, as chairman of the Policy Commission, I say that we always start from the individual and never from the collective. Since each individual is unique, we should not reduce them to external characteristics. That is also the reason why I rejected the women's quota. Ultimately, after years of debate, we agreed on a compromise. That too is democracy.
How can the CDU become more distinguishable again in the political competition after a 16-year middle course under Angela Merkel?
By not already going public with a compromise. 100 percent union is needed in the future. The party must always be offensive and self-confident and take a clear stance. We first have to learn that again, because in the past 16 years of legislative periods we sometimes didn't even know what the difference between the chancellor's office and the party was. That hurt the party. That is why the basic program is now so extremely important. At the end of the day, we need 5 to 10 central positions that we cannot change and that differ from other parties in this respect. And we're on the right track there. We need a little patience, but we will work out a very good result for the party.
Does the CDU need more clarity again in order to be able to get their demands through in public?
We need more clear edges that are factually justified and are not morally excessive in the debate. Because that is the best principle for doing politics successfully and pragmatically.
Under Angela Merkel, the CDU decided to phase out nuclear power and to build Nord Stream 2. What is the CDU's part in the fact that we are in a historic energy crisis?
For a long time we were too naive in dealing with Russia, and I too was convinced by the foreign policy concept of change through trade. Admittedly, I wasn't one of the critics of Nord Stream 2 either. We must also self-critically blame ourselves for the fact that the CDU did not develop a sensible strategy in the wake of the nuclear phase-out in 2011 on how the country's energy supply could be secured without nuclear power. But it is also true that most parties saw gas as a bridging technology to get into renewable energies.
How do you rate the crisis management of the Ministry of Economics at the moment under Robert Habeck?
Inadequate. The CDU can certainly be accused of something that went wrong in the past. In a crisis, however, we have historically always put aside the party membership and faced the emergency situation. But the Federal Ministry of Economics is discussing the smallest branch of party ideology instead of finally taking decisive action. Even eight months after the terrible outbreak of war in Ukraine, households and small and medium-sized businesses still have no planning security. In addition, government support for the horrendous energy costs is insufficient. Robert Habeck is jeopardizing the industrial backbone of our economy. Once the companies are gone, things look bleak. Therefore, the Ministry of Economy urgently needs to wake up. The traffic light coalition can count on the support of the Union.
What would you have done differently than the Federal Ministry of Economics in the last few months?
We would have organized the payments of state aid through the tax offices and approved KfW loans with a 100 percent state guarantee. In addition, the state aid would already have been handed out, since we would have seen what is currently at stake compared to the traffic light coalition. Post-war recessions, like the 1970s oil crisis or the 2008 financial crisis, were all one-dimensional. For the first time in our history, all trains are running towards each other. The problems of the shortage of skilled workers, the supply chains and the energy supply are closely related and endanger our prosperity existentially. Therefore we would not have hesitated, but decided.
The Greens were in the traffic light coalition against the continued operation of the remaining nuclear power plants and speak out against fracking. Is their own ideology more important to the Greens than jobs and affordable electricity prices?
When it came to nuclear power, one had the impression that it was not Germany's well-being that provided the orientation, but rather ideological considerations. If there's a fire in a place, I don't first ask how unwieldy the road is. Then I stand up and try to do everything for the fire brigade to get through. And now we have this emergency situation. Therefore, one should expand the supply of energy with all available possibilities. And I'm sure that in the spring we'll have to hold a debate about extending nuclear power plants again.
The introduction of citizen income failed last week due to the abstention of the Union in the Bundesrat. What are your main criticisms of the draft law?
The entire law goes in the completely wrong direction. It eliminates the notion of demanding and focuses solely on encouragement. There is no doubt that there are many people in Germany who need support because they cannot work for physical or psychological reasons. But there are also many who simply do not want it for convenience. We live in a welfare state that can only function if it is fair and meets with approval from mainstream society. The central goal of a welfare state should therefore be to promote personal responsibility among its citizens. In an emergency, the authorities must also be able to impose sanctions on unemployed people who show no effort. However, the planned trust period of the traffic light coalition would like to override this.
Doesn't the Union gamble away its profile as a social party by rejecting citizens' income?
No, just the opposite. For me, the principle of subsidiarity is essential for my understanding of a Christian party. This means that we must do everything we can to help those unemployed who would like to work but cannot. And for that there is the help of our solidarity community. But everyone who can work, who can take their life into their own hands, must also do so, otherwise our country will no longer be able to afford a social system in the long run.
SPD chairman Lars Klingbeil accused Friedrich Merz of spreading false claims in the style of Donald Trump in the debate about citizen income. What do you think?
As a democrat, I would like to warn Lars Klingbeil at this point. Comparing Friedrich Merz and Donald Trump is not only completely wrong, but also dangerous for our democracy. It leads to a brutalization of the language if we only discuss extremes and superlatives with each other. Our country's political culture is in jeopardy when we fight each other's integrity in mud fights. Political competitors must not become enemies. Therefore, our debate should always be conducted in a fact-based tone of decency and respect.
What could a compromise proposal by the traffic light coalition look like that they would support as Union parties?
That would have to be a compromise proposal that also takes into account the principle of making demands. If we get such a legislative proposal on the table, we will also pledge our support to the traffic light coalition. Because one thing is clear: the Union will not support a radical system change in our welfare state at the expense of the hard-working middle of society.
Comments
Post a Comment