Vote in parliament
Another scandal? Bundestag votes on migration
The prospect that the Union could bring a draft law by the Bundestag for the first time with the votes of the AfD mobilize tens of thousands of people to protest. Does the decision come?
Tens of thousands of people demonstrate against a joint coordination of the Union and AfD in migration policy – but on Friday a law could happen the Bundestag in which the votes of the AfD could be decisive. The draft introduced by the CDU and CSU deals with concrete regulations on the containment of migration. After the Bundestag, the project would still have to be done by the state chamber, the Federal Council. Approval is not certain there.
On Wednesday, the Union had already enforced an application to tighten migration policy in the Bundestag on Wednesday. However, the application only had an appeal character. Since then, the outrage of the procedure of Union faction leader Friedrich Merz (CDU), who is also the top candidate of the CDU and CSU for the Bundestag election. Therefore, tens of thousands of people took the street alone on Thursday – including in Berlin, Freiburg, Hanover and Munich.
What is the bill about?
The core of the draft law of the Union faction, to which the FDP, the AfD and the BSW have signaled approval, is the suspension of family reunification to refugees with limited protection status. This group includes many Syrians in Germany. In addition, the powers of the federal police are to be expanded. In the future, if it meets in its area of responsibility – for example at train stations – who is obliged to leave, it will be able to provide deportation.
In its draft, the Union also penetrates the goal of a “limitation” of the influx of foreigners back into the Residence Act. This had deleted the traffic light coalition, which had now been reduced to red-green.
From March 2016 to July 2018, the family reunification for so-called subsidiary beneficiaries was suspended by the then black and red coalition. At the time, this was justified with the intention of avoiding an overload in recording and integration. Since August 2018, a total of 1,000 people have been allowed to enter this protection status as relatives of people. The coalition agreement of SPD, Greens and FDP actually stipulated that family reunification to people from this group should also be possible again. However, this project was not implemented.
What votes did there have been before?
On Wednesday, an application from the Union had been decided on the border in the Bundestag because the AfD as well as numerous MPs from the FDP and some of them had agreed. Politicians from the SPD, the Greens and the left criticized Union faction leader Merz and spoke of a breach of taboo. Unlike the 5-point plan accepted on Wednesday, the bill now standing has legal consequences. The Federal Government would have to implement the changes proposed therein if it should be decided.
How does the vote work?
In the Bundestag, the “inflow limitation law” is voted on by name. In this procedure, each MP thrashes his voice card – in the end it is published how everyone has coordinated. A simple majority is necessary, i.e. more yes than no. Together with AfD, BSW and FDP, the Union has a majority in the Bundestag.
How will it go on if the Bundestag agrees?
The Federal Council would also have to agree to the draft law. Since no efforts have so far been made to ask the country chamber to reduce the deadline, the Federal Council would only decide in March – after the Bundestag election planned for February 23. However, it is questionable whether there will be a majority for the project in the Federal Council.
If the law of the Bundestag and the Federal Council is decided, the SPD may want to move to the Federal Constitutional Court. The tightening of the migration rules aimed at by the Union “would have to be” checked absolutely constitutionally law, “said SPD general secretary Matthias Miersch of the German Press Agency. “In this respect, we definitely keep this path open.”
What do the parties say before the vote?
Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) accused Merz that he could no longer be trusted when asked about a possible cooperation with the AfD. Merz said with a view to the draft of the Union law, he didn’t care who agreed, Scholz told the broadcaster RTL. “This is a policy that is not geared towards consensus and cooperation, but that wants exactly that, namely the approval of the AfD,” said Scholz.
Union Chancellor candidate Friedrich Merz again appealed to the SPD. “Until the end, I do not give up the hope that the Social Democrats will find the strength to agree with the proposal from us,” he said at a campaign appearance in Dresden.
The SPD interior politician Dirk Wiese made Merz a clear rejection. The Union has repeatedly rejected serious and constructive conversations on internal security and migration issues, he told the “Rheinische Post”. “Now we will quickly present this half-born bill in Friss-Oder-Stirb-Manner? We certainly don’t go with that.”
Green Group leader Katharina Dröge urged the Union to vote again with the AfD. “Wednesday was the taboo break. Friday would be the repetition act,” she told the “Süddeutsche Zeitung”.
Criticism also in your own ranks
There was also resistance from prominent members within the CDU. The publicist and moderator Michel Friedman declared leaving the CDU on Thursday. With a view to the vote on Wednesday, he told the HR: “For the first time, a democratic party, in the case my former party CDU, made it possible that the AfD carried out a majority in parliament with this democratic party. And this taboo break is unused. “
Former Chancellor Angela Merkel intervened and called it “wrong” to enable a majority with votes from the AfD for the first time. In a declaration published by her office, the Chancellor AD reminded of an earlier statement by Merz to only make decisions agreed with the SPD and the Greens so that no majority come about with the AfD.
CDU general secretary Carsten Linnemann defended the Union’s approach. “We are not doing together with AfD. I don’t care what they do,” said Linnemann in the ZDF talk show “Maybrit Illner”. If, for fear of “someone could agree”, not in his conviction, according to Linnemann, “then this is no longer a parliament, no democratic parliament”.
dpa
Source: Stern
I have been working in the news industry for over 6 years, first as a reporter and now as an editor. I have covered politics extensively, and my work has appeared in major newspapers and online news outlets around the world. In addition to my writing, I also contribute regularly to 24 Hours World.
