At the end of this week, the Bundestag is to vote on the heating law. Instead, the opposition is calling for further consultations.
The opposition in the Bundestag has failed with a motion to delay a decision on the controversial “heating law”. With the majority of the coalition factions SPD, Greens and FDP, a motion was rejected on Tuesday not to put the building energy law – the so-called heating law – on the agenda on Friday. The coalition then wants to pass the law.
The Building Energy Act should actually be passed at the beginning of July and thus before the start of the summer break. Previously there had been long conflicts in the traffic light coalition. The coalition then agreed on fundamental changes.
However, the Federal Constitutional Court stopped an adoption before the summer break. The court had expressed doubts as to whether the rights of the deputies were sufficiently protected. The CDU MP Thomas Heilmann had applied for a temporary injunction because of the tight schedule in the legislative process. The coalition then decided that the law should be passed in the Bundestag after the summer break in early September.
Opposition calls for further consultations
The Parliamentary Secretary of the CDU/CSU MPs in the Bundestag, Thorsten Frei (CDU), accused the coalition of wanting to push the law through the Bundestag. This does not correspond to the requirements of the Constitutional Court. From Frei’s point of view, there must be further consultations in the responsible Bundestag committee and another hearing of experts. The coalition is afraid of consultations, of its own quarrels and “centrifugal forces” within the coalition. Your actions harm parliamentarianism.
The Parliamentary Secretary of the Left, Jan Korte, accused the coalition of arrogance. In addition, it is good practice not to pass any laws in budget weeks.
Coalition speakers denied the allegations. There was sufficient time for deliberations. The parliamentary manager of the SPD parliamentary group, Katja Mast, said that the citizens and the companies now wanted to have clarity.
Source: Stern
