How the SPD is trying to put the FDP under pressure

Christian Lindner may not be on site, but he is omnipresent. More precisely: his blocking stance in the budget mess. At least that’s how the SPD sees it, which is holding its party conference in Berlin this weekend. For self-assurance, but also to send one or two messages. One is addressed to the FDP leader.

The message from the comrades goes something like this: The 2024 budget must come in as quickly as possible and as lavishly equipped as necessary. Without any compromises. This requires a declaration of an emergency. So new debt.

Lindner doesn’t go along with it. He is sticking to the debt brake and would like to collect the billions missing after the Karlsruhe ruling. He recently said that he was “not yet convinced” that the conditions for an emergency resolution in 2024 would be met.

Wait: Not “yet”?

Lindner is keeping a back door open, signaling that he is flexible on the issue. At least in theory. In practice, the FDP leader will probably only be able to force himself to abandon one of his two liberal guidelines – no tax increases, no new debt – at a very high price. What does the finance minister want?

A rumor is floating through the City Cube in Berlin. If you talk to comrades about it, they will confirm the story behind closed doors. Accordingly, the FDP leader wants to provoke a break in the coalition and insist on his expulsion. Why else would Lindner want to cut citizens’ benefits, which the SPD vehemently rejects (and is also difficult to do legally)? Or let the Chancellor show up? Olaf Scholz was unable to present an agreement in the budget dispute at the party conference, and the 2024 budget can no longer be passed this year. Many see the reason for this primarily in the FDP.

The narrative comes from the party leadership, some say. Others point to the Bundestag faction. This much can be considered certain: the suspicion is spread without much inhibition, perhaps consciously – you can already read about it in the media. This could have various reasons.

One of them: If Lindner actually provokes his expulsion, they don’t want to do him the favor of being seen as a martyr, they say. True to the motto: It is better not to govern than to govern incorrectly. So the alleged cheating is uncovered.

Another reason: If Lindner has that exit strategy, you could close the door on him and keep him at the negotiating table.

And last but not least: The story also distracts from one’s own responsibility in the budget chaos; after all, the SPD Chancellor played no small part in the unconstitutional debt trickery.

None of the traffic light parties can be responsible for a break in the coalition. According to current surveys, everyone would leave the field as losers in possible new elections. The FDP would even have to worry about returning to the Bundestag. Therefore, one should not give too much credence to the circulating narrative about forced traffic lights being turned off. The story is therefore intended to serve one goal: to increase the pressure on Lindner and the FDP to clear the way for an emergency declaration.

Ukraine aid as a bridge for the FDP

In order to allay the FDP leader’s final concerns (“not yet convinced”), the comrades are trying to build a bridge for him at their party conference by making him responsible for supporting Ukraine.

Aid to Ukraine appears as a possible reason for an emergency in practically every speech by the party leadership. On Saturday, Chancellor Scholz also joined the chorus that the party leaders sang the day before. The war will not be over as quickly as one would like, says Scholz. And makes it clear: “We continue to support Ukraine in its defense struggle.” But to do that we have to make “decisions that will keep us in a position to do that.” He spoke of a major financial effort, not just this year, but also “the next year and the one after that.” It was a wave with the fence post.

The step to circumvent the debt brake because of the Ukraine war would probably not only be compatible with the judge’s ruling from Karlsruhe. He would also be difficult to criticize, not least for the FDP. The SPD is obviously trying to grab hold of the Liberals where the Liberals have always shown themselves determined: with financial and military aid for Ukraine. Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (FDP), one of the most vocal supporters, had recently warned against cutting spending for the country attacked by Russia after the Karlsruhe ruling.

The previous commitments to Ukraine for next year alone amount to eight billion euros. There would also be costs for the Ukrainian refugees in Germany. If this money were raised through debt beyond the debt brake, at least a significant part of the 17 billion euros that Finance Minister Lindner says is missing for the 2024 budget would be raised. If one wanted to raise the money from the core budget instead – for example by cutting social benefits – the voters’ willingness to help Ukraine could change.

Chancellor Scholz made it clear in his party conference speech that there would be “no dismantling of the welfare state”. This is not a fundamental rejection of savings, but it is a clear signal that there will not be much to be gained here. This is also a nod to his finance minister.

The pressure is growing on the coalition leaders to at least reach a political agreement this year. Nobody should have any interest in placing the unresolved traffic light differences under the citizens’ Christmas tree for detailed exegesis, and certainly not in dragging the issue into next year.

That’s why the SPD is accelerating the process with gentle pressure. An initiative proposal from the party executive committee, which was decided on Saturday, calls for the debt brake to be suspended again. With reference to the additional burdens caused by the war in Ukraine. FDP leader Lindner isn’t quite there yet. Not yet.