Wien Sometimes it was not easy for Federal President Alexander Van der Bellen to endure, as he says in the UN interview. Climate protection has been neglected for 30 to 40 years, but worse can be prevented. He does not understand the outcry over the evaluation of planned road construction projects by Asfinag. “Nobody should be surprised when Transport Minister Leonore Gewessler asks whether the priorities can possibly be set differently.” The Federal President also expresses his astonishment at the findings from the Ibiza-U Committee, including the delivery of files. “I don’t quite understand why Finance Minister Gernot Blümel was so hesitant.” He could have saved everyone a lot of excitement. Van der Bellen, on the other hand, praised Justice Minister Alma Zadic, who was able to prevail against intra-coalition resistance. When asked whether a general amendment to the Federal Constitution would go too far to be able to initiate a referendum again in Vorarlberg against the will of a local council, he says: “I noticed with interest that Vorarlberg has completely different rules in some things than the rest Austria. ”So you can make local and regional exceptions if it has a certain history and tradition. Throughout Austria, however, he feels that the requirements for referendums are correct.
–
How are you as a politician who has been warning of the dangers of the climate crisis for decades and now sees how the catastrophic storms are increasing?
–
In between it was not easy to endure. Because we have missed 30 or 40 years. But we still have a chance to prevent the worst. I’m optimistic about that. The mood has changed completely in the past three to five years. However, there was much more commitment, energy and nervousness on the part of the youth and the very young as well as from the economy than on the part of politics. In certain sectors of the economy it has also been recognized that the risks in the market are changing. Think of the banking business, for example: when a customer wants a loan of 100 million euros, the sector is first considered. Will these 100 million euros still be invested sustainably in ten years’ time or are they money lost?
–
Climate protection minister Leonore Gewessler has Asfinag projects such as the S18 checked for precisely these questions. How seriously do our politicians take climate change if it causes an outcry?
–
Nobody should really be surprised when the minister responsible for climate protection ponders which road construction projects are still appropriate in this situation. And if she wonders whether the priorities can possibly be set differently. Transport is the sector in which greenhouse gas emissions have increased the most in the past few decades.
–
Do you see too much lip service on the part of politics for climate protection or does the participation of the green government bring about a U-turn?
–
I believe that governments around the world, but especially in Europe, are reacting to the situation, almost regardless of whether there are Greens in government or not. This is not a green hobby, but the Greens were probably the first to recognize the problem in all of its dimensions. For example, the Greens presented an energy tax program around 20 years ago: while the price of what is associated with greenhouse gas emissions must rise over time, taxes on labor must fall. One could also think of something for certain groups of commuters. The idea is not new …
–
… and is now in the government program. Apart from that, how are you doing with the federal government?
–
As the Federal President, I try to be completely neutral.
–
However, you gave a high-profile address in which you called for more respect for the institutions. This was primarily addressed to the ÖVP, which had messed with the judiciary. Has your appeal been too little heard?
–
It is always a question of weighing up whether and when to say something. I don’t want to be the senior teacher or senior teacher of the nation. But I believe that most of them have now understood that such situations are about more than just a short-term political outbreak. Respect for the judiciary is essential. She must be able to work unhindered. I don’t quite understand why Finance Minister Gernot Blümel was so hesitant about delivering the files to the U-Committee. I do not quite understand why I was forced to carry out an execution via the detour of the order of the Constitutional Court (VfGH). That could have been done with less attention and with the same result.
–
How do you rate all of this in retrospect?
–
Bottom line: It was the usual political arguments, if you disregard the background noise: It is the job of the opposition to try to control the government. It is obvious that not every minister enjoys it, but rather sees it as a hindrance.
–
Were you surprised or shocked by the results of the Ibiza-U Committee?
–
I was neither frightened nor particularly surprised, but in detail I was alienated. I didn’t take the chat history that seriously. They were embarrassing, but essentially criminally irrelevant. On the other hand, I was very impressed by the Justice Minister’s decisions. It has separated the section for legislation from that of the individual criminal cases. That brought her considerable resistance within the coalition.
–
Because it was primarily about Christian Pilnacek, the then high-ranking judicial officer.
–
In my opinion it was the right decision.
–
Should one trust in the moral sense of the individual or are stricter rules needed in certain areas?
–
Everyone should consider: Can I represent what I do to the outside world with good reason or is it so sensitive that it has to be kept secret? Then I should let it go. That is obvious. But as experience shows, it is not obvious enough. It’s also about resisting temptation. When I was still in parliament, the Green Club received an offer from an interest group to provide an employee free of charge. The Greens refused. Other clubs didn’t. Everyone has to decide for themselves what is politically, legally and morally justifiable. The public and, above all, you as the representative of the independent media must watch over this.
–
The Constitutional Court has just overturned a provision in Vorarlberg that a referendum cannot be initiated against the will of the municipal council. Should direct democracy only ever be seen as a supplement to representative democracy?
–
At its core, we have a representative democracy. The will of the people is represented by the elected parliamentarians. This does not rule out that certain projects can be secured through surveys and referendums, especially at the local and regional level. I also think that is sensible.
–
An overall amendment to the federal constitution would be needed in order to be able to do this again in Vorarlberg against the will of a municipal council. Is that going too far?
–
I noticed with interest that Vorarlberg has completely different rules than the rest of Austria in some things, for example also with regard to the pre-selection of mayoral candidates in some municipalities. So you can make local, regional exceptions if it has a certain history and tradition. Across Austria, however, a proper referendum can only be made through a law, and I think that’s right.
–
Are you going to run for a second term?
–
The elections are expected in October 2022. I will announce my decision in good time.
—
