Berlin When Robert Habeck (Greens) and Christian Lindner (FDP) sat on the government bench in the Bundestag on Thursday, they seemed to get along very well. During the speeches of the deputies, the finance and economy ministers whispered to each other, joked and laughed.
In public, Habeck and Lindner like to be casual. Behind the facade, the two politicians wrestle hard with each other. Whether it’s the promotion of electric cars, longer lifespans for nuclear power plants, more debt or higher taxes – there is now hardly an issue on which the two are not fighting.
For Habeck, the gas surcharge, which is intended to stabilize energy suppliers, is a constant annoyance. The Economics Minister would like to bury the measure and finance the rescue of energy companies directly from Lindner’s budget. However, he wants to comply with the debt brake and insists on implementing the gas levy.
Top jobs of the day
Find the best jobs now and
be notified by email.
The dispute led to chaos this week not seen since the start of the traffic light coalition. From Habeck’s house it was said that the gas levy would probably no longer come, while at the same time it was said from Lindner’s department that it would definitely come.
Then the Economics Ministry emphasized that the legal review of the gas levy had not yet been completed. In the Ministry of Finance, on the other hand, there was information that all legal questions had been clarified for days.
“They must finally pull themselves together”
The escalating dispute between finance and economics ministers is now affecting the work of the federal government. “The two of them must finally pull themselves together, we are facing what is perhaps the country’s biggest economic crisis,” says a government representative.
The basic conflict between the ministers is determined by the fact that Habeck would like to spend a lot more money. “Christian Lindner pays” – that was Habeck’s motto back in the summer when he promised state aid at a works meeting in the refinery in Schwedt.
Lindner, on the other hand, made it clear months ago that he wanted to readjust financial policy: after three years of record debt due to the corona pandemic, the debt brake should come into effect again from 2023.
The dispute over the gas surcharge is also essentially a conflict over the debt rule. Habeck would like to get rid of the unpopular construct, Lindner should pay instead.
>> Read here: Rescue package of eight billion euros: the federal government takes over Uniper
The Ministry of Finance, on the other hand, considers such tax financing to be wrong, because then all those who heat with heating oil, wood pellets or a heat pump would also be charged, although they have either already invested in other heating systems or – in the case of heating oil – have had higher prices for many years.
The dispute over the gas levy also reveals something about the way the two politicians look at each other. Lindner thinks that Habeck is rhetorically brilliant, but there is not enough substance behind it. Habeck finds that all of Lindner’s actions are dominated by flat party tactics.
The two worlds separate not only in terms of political craftsmanship, but also in terms of basic convictions. While Habeck believes in the need for a strong state, especially in times of crisis, Lindner trusts in the healing powers of the market.
This is exactly why Habeck thinks Lindner is an ideologue who puts the welfare of his own party and his own beliefs above the welfare of the state. Habeck cannot understand why Lindner is carrying around compliance with the debt brake like a monstrance in this crisis.
Habeck’s angry speech at the industry
Habeck vented his anger on Thursday at the climate congress of the Federation of German Industries (BDI). In his 19-minute speech, Habeck manages not to utter the name Lindner once, but still throws one tip after the other against his liberal coalition colleague.
The federal government has already done a lot to relieve the burden on companies, but much more needs to be done. “I think it would be misunderstood to say: We will have a balanced budget next year, but a wave of insolvencies that will tear us down in the next few years,” explains Habeck.
>> Read here: “Now I’m making a loss with every roll”: Journey through an entrepreneurial country at the limit
The Economics Minister thinks that Lindner must also make sacrifices at the turn of the century. “We have set up a large special fund to defend our country from a military point of view,” he said. That was not an easy step for his party, the Greens. “Now we have to defend the economic substance of our country.”
The message is clear: Lindner and the FDP should put their convictions aside, act pragmatically and suspend the debt brake. Habeck: “We have to use the financial policy options that this country has.”
From Habeck’s point of view, companies should react to the high prices with energy savings. And where they get into serious trouble as a result, the state has to step in and support them financially.
Lindner has nothing against further corporate aid. But the situation is a little different for him. “We can’t work on credit all the time,” is his credo.
He therefore rejects overly large rescue packages that could become permanent subsidies. Especially if cabinet colleague Habeck does not do everything at the same time to increase the supply of energy.
Controversy over nuclear power plants and tax policy
That too is a fundamental difference. Despite the energy crisis, Habeck wants to shut down the last three nuclear power plants as quickly as possible, or at most keep two in reserve for a few months. He also only wants to start up coal-fired power plants in the short term, and the fracking ban should remain in place. And if the scarce energy supply leads to rising prices, the state should compensate.
Lindner considers this course to be economically negligent. In his view, the energy crisis can only be brought under control if supply is increased again. This includes a temporary continued operation of the nuclear power plants as well as a lifting of the fracking ban in Germany.
The Isar 2 nuclear power plant is still in operation. If Robert Habeck had his way, the last three nuclear power plants would be shut down as soon as possible.
(Photo: dpa)
From Lindner’s point of view, there should be no additional burdens. While Economics Minister Habeck expressed sympathy for an excess profit tax early on, Lindner vehemently rejected it. Many leading politicians in the Greens also repeatedly advocate an increase in taxes for higher earners. That too is taboo for Lindner.
And the list of points of contention is much longer: Habeck and Lindner were already arguing about the promotion of electric cars in the summer, then about higher taxation of company cars and finally about the successor to the nine-euro ticket.
Cold progression also remains a permanent conflict. Lindner finds these gradual tax increases, which are caused by inflation and rising tax rates, unfair and wants to compensate for them. When Lindner’s inflation compensation law was debated in the Bundestag this week, Green finance politician Andreas Audretsch described the project as a wrong instrument – much to the displeasure of the finance minister, who sat on the government bench. The affront among coalition partners was only somewhat mitigated by the fact that Audretsch assured the Greens’ approval because it was an overall package.
>> Read here: Who will benefit the most from taking down the cold progression
The next conflict is already emerging in energy policy. After Uniper, Habeck’s people also want to expropriate the company Sefe, which was formerly called Gazprom Germania. However, the Federal Ministry of Finance is slowing down. There is concern that in return Putin could nationalize German subsidiaries in Russia.
The desire for “Plisch & Plum 2.0”
Some in the government are now demanding that Chancellor Olaf Scholz have a say in power. But regardless of whether Scholz is the mediator or not – in the end Habeck and Lindner have to pull themselves together.
When the two had another public dispute in mid-September with staggered speeches at the Employers’ Day, the economist Michael Hüther tweeted that if you listen to Lindner and Habeck, the question arises as to whether both are not following the example of Karl Schiller and Franz Josef Strauss should follow.
Strauss and Schiller were a good tandem during the first economic crisis in the Federal Republic of Germany from 1966 to 1969 and were therefore christened “Plisch und Plum” in reference to a story by Wilhelm Busch. Lindner and Habeck, warns Hüther, should now form “Plisch & Plum 2.0”.
More: The traffic light’s hidden power mechanisms: three high-ranking civil servants keep the coalition running