/cloudfront-eu-central-1.images.arcpublishing.com/madsack/62HW7P62VNFCFLZ5QTY4TKT6JY.jpeg "“We definitely cannot afford tax cuts for businesses and the rich”")
Mr. Werneke, does the country need tax cuts?
Germany has put a lot of money into hand to support the economy in the Corona crisis. We definitely cannot afford tax cuts for companies and the rich, as can be found in the programs of the Union and FDP for the federal elections. Spending money here that we don’t have would be irresponsible.
Union Chancellor candidate Armin Laschet says the basic message of the CDU is that there can be no tax relief at the moment.
I take the Union’s election platform seriously – and people must also assume that parties mean what they decide to do.
The Union’s electoral program clearly sets the wrong accents in tax policy: There is both a reduction in corporate taxes and the abolition of the solidarity surcharge for those with very high incomes. The Union, on the other hand, has no specific plans for people with low and middle incomes – that is disappointing.
How is Germany getting off the debts that accumulated in the Corona crisis?
I warn against dramatizing when looking at the debt level. By the end of the year we will have reached a level at which the national debt will amount to around 74 percent of the gross domestic product. That is more than before the crisis, but significantly less than after the financial market crisis. That means: we are not allowed to give out tax gifts to the rich, but we do not have to pursue an austerity course to pay off debts, that would cause great damage.
Söder: Tax relief is the basic philosophy of the Union
–
CSU boss Markus Söder has spoken out in favor of relief in the next legislative period in the internal debate on tax policy. © dpa
— –
So what is your specific proposal?
I advocate organizing economic growth, then the level of national debt in relation to gross domestic product will automatically decrease. Active debt repayment would burden the budgets too much and take away the leeway for urgently needed investments.
The debt brake is too tight a corset in the current situation. So it is sensible for us not to put the debt brake back into force for the time being. If there is no majority in favor of its abolition, then it must at least be fundamentally reformed – with the golden rule: investments in the future must not be counted towards debt. We have to create investment corridors for the debt brake.
Where do you see the greatest need for investment in the coming years?
In the municipalities alone there is undoubtedly an investment backlog of 170 billion euros – there is an urgent need for action in local transport and many buildings. When I look into the future, I see a great need for investment to make the country fit for the future, especially in climate policy.
In this case, we are talking – business and unions agree – over 50 billion euros a year for the next ten years. We need a decade of investment.
Your union represents many low-income people. Are their interests sufficiently taken into account when shaping climate policy?
Almost all parties are keeping a slim foot on the issue of social compensation for the costs of climate change. It is dishonest to pretend that reducing CO₂ emissions does not change the realities of people’s lives.
At this point, the election manifesto of the Greens comes closest to our demands: It would be correct to give all additional income generated in the context of CO₂ pricing back to the population in full – via a uniform contribution for each individual. The increase in the price of electricity must be capped and special regulations are needed for commuters.
EU presents package for climate change in economy and transport
–
Core elements are a Europe-wide obligation to purchase CO₂ pollution rights for fuel, heating oil or gas. © Reuters
— –
Does the fight against climate change threaten to divide society?
If we do not shape the costs of the necessary fight against climate change socially, there is considerable potential for dividing our society. It’s not just about higher costs for driving or flying on vacation. When it comes to living, there are high costs for energy-efficient renovation. What the fight against climate change means for the food market is also still greatly underestimated.
What do you fear exactly?
Let’s just talk about this using the example of meat. Meat must and will become more expensive due to the ecological restructuring and the fight against climate change. Animal fattening is a huge driver of emissions. If large parts of society can no longer afford meat for at least every few days, we will not be able to take people with us in the course of ecological change.
Verdi cooperates with Fridays for Future, for example with joint events and campaigns. What do you have in common?
Fridays for Future and Verdi agree that the fight against climate change is essential for survival. And also about the fact that the ecological turnaround must be socially just.
In the fight against climate change, there must not be a trade in indulgences organized via the CO₂ price, with the help of which the rich can continue to live as before and only the poor have to limit their consumption. We are particularly united by the struggle for the expansion of local public transport that should be affordable for everyone.
How do you, as a union, stand on the debate about mandatory vaccinations for nurses and day-care center staff in the Corona crisis?
The vaccination rates for nurses and daycare workers are high. I know many nurses personally – and they are all vaccinated. The rate for daycare staff is around 80 percent. Compulsory vaccination for certain groups of workers would be a massive encroachment on fundamental rights that cannot be justified.
I recommend all nurses, all educators and our members in general to get vaccinated. I am also very much in favor of doing everything possible to make vaccination even easier for the people in the country. Let’s send vaccination vehicles out, let’s convince people. Coercion cannot and must not be the solution.
–
