Shortly before the new round of consultations between the federal and state health ministers on Tuesday, the debate about the planned corona rules for autumn and winter is gaining momentum. The CDU health politician Erwin Rüddel sees Germany on a “wrong path”: Germany must find “a completely different approach” in corona policy than before, he told Deutschlandfunk. It is true that people with previous illnesses, the vulnerable in the hospitals, should be protected. Otherwise, however, there must be more normality and personal responsibility again – “just like in almost all other countries in Europe”.
criticism from within their own ranks
Clear criticism of the draft of the new infection protection law, which Federal Health Minister Karl Lauterbach (SPD) had negotiated with Justice Minister Marco Buschmann (FDP), also comes from the FDP. “It is not clear to me why, for example, a mask requirement can be imposed outdoors,” said Bundestag Vice President Wolfgang Kubicki of “Welt” – and, like other FDP politicians, demanded revisions. Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania’s Prime Minister Manuela Schwesig (SPD) is meanwhile calling for consultations with the Prime Ministers on the future Infection Protection Act.
Countries can enact stricter rules
According to the draft, from October there should be a nationwide FFP2 mask requirement in long-distance transport, in hospitals and care facilities. There is also a test requirement in clinics. In addition, the federal states should be allowed to impose stricter corona restrictions – for example, a mask requirement indoors. In gastronomy, at leisure, cultural and sporting events, those who have tested negative, those who have just recovered or those who have just been vaccinated should omit the mask – the most recent vaccination must not be more than three months ago.
If the corona situation worsens, a hotspot rule also allows for a mask requirement at outdoor events, a distance requirement and upper limits for people.
CDU politician complains about “panic mode”
CDU politician Erwin Rüddel criticized that, in addition to those who have been tested and those who have recovered, only newly vaccinated people should be exempted from possible mask requirements. “I do not understand that.” He is very positive about vaccination. “But the fact that practically everything is now being set to zero and that you should be vaccinated every three months – in my opinion, this suggestion only exists in Germany,” he complained. The plans are very problematic because they do not correspond to the recommendation of the Standing Vaccination Commission (Stiko): “The population is unsettled.” Attempts are being made to decide on measures that bypass the Stiko.
Rüddel is convinced that “a relatively relaxed Corona autumn and winter” is imminent. A “major basic immunization” was achieved in the summer. Looking ahead to the next few months, he is more worried about the flu than Corona.
The CDU politician accused the Federal Minister of Health of spreading panic. “And I’m surprised that the FDP is now participating in this panic mode.” However, there are already a number of FDP voices calling for changes, said Rüddel. He was convinced that the draft law in its present form would not be passed by the Bundestag. “I think there will be significant changes there.”
Lauterbach: “Always the same resistance”
Lauterbach rejected the criticism. “Always the same resistance,” he tweeted. “Protecting older people and those with pre-existing conditions is our duty, even if it costs money and is uncomfortable.” At the time of Angela Merkel, the CDU was still there. “Now caution, care, science are defamed as panic.” Federal Minister of Justice Buschmann had already defended the compromise with Lauterbach against criticism in the past few days.
FDP politicians: regression and annoyance
In addition to Kubicki, other FDP members of the Bundestag demanded improvements to the draft. Frank Schäffler described the possibility of a nationwide hotspot regulation in the “world” as a step backwards and the possible mask requirement in secondary schools as a nuisance. According to Christoph Hoffmann, the paper “will not find a majority in its current form”. MP Rainer Semet expressed his displeasure via Twitter on Sunday: “We have to start rethinking corona policy in order to get back to normal as soon as possible!”
Bavaria’s FDP leader Martin Hagen also expressed clear doubts. “In politics, the last word is always spoken after the parliamentary process has been completed – not after a draft has been submitted by the ministries,” he tweeted, quoting former SPD parliamentary group leader Peter Struck: “No law leaves the Bundestag the way it comes in .” Hagen had already complained last week that “some nonsense” was still possible at state level. The FDP health expert in the state parliament, Dominik Spitzer, had also identified “some weaknesses” in the new draft law.
Free voters: “End the Lauterbach panic”
The free voter health expert in the state parliament, Susann Enders, completely rejects the new paper: “The fact is: Due to the current infection situation, the stable situation in the hospitals and the generally mild course of Covid, we currently do not need any further measures and neither new infection protection law,” she said. On Twitter, she added: “No more Lauterbach panic.”
Scholz supports the proposal
On the other hand, FDP parliamentary group leader Christian Dürr defended the measures as a good compromise. The FDP has achieved that there will be no more lockdowns, curfews, school closures or contact restrictions. Government spokesman Steffen Hebestreit said in Berlin: “The proposal is now on the table and it also has the support of the Chancellor.” It must now be discussed with one another and then adopted in good time.
The SPD health politician Christos Pantazis said on Deutschlandfunk that the agreed adjustments to the Infection Protection Act make sense and are correct – “and this explicitly includes the obligation to wear masks in several areas”. However, this “workable compromise” will certainly be sharpened at one point or another in the parliamentary process. “Now it’s not like that’s the ultimate wisdom.”
Holetschek and Schwesig want to have a say
This Tuesday, the federal and state health ministers want to discuss the situation in the Health Ministers’ Conference (GMK). Bavaria’s Health Minister Klaus Holetschek (CSU) sees a lot of need for clarification. Already last week he welcomed the fact that the “toolbox” of the countries was being discussed in the GMK and that the countries could contribute their voice there. “It’s about time! Because the previous procedure was not dealing on an equal footing between the federal and state governments for me.”
In Schwesig’s opinion, the prime ministers of the federal states would also have to coordinate. There is a regular exchange at the level of the health ministers, which is right, the SPD politician told the editorial network Germany (RND). “But I think it is necessary for the heads of government to discuss this.”
–
