Devastating signal: This increase in diet must be stopped

You have to look back for a few years to understand the historical dimension of the planned diet increase for members of the Bundestag. In 2008, the grand coalition at the time wanted to adapt the remuneration of the parliamentarians to the salaries of the federal judges. At that time this led to extremely violent discussions. The Union and SPD stopped the project: not conveyable.

This Thursday, the diets are to be increased massively in the second year in a row. As of July 1st, they should increase by 606 euros to 11,833.47 euros. That would be an increase of 5.4 percent. The diets had increased by six percent in the previous year. Of all things, in one of the largest economic crises in the history of the Federal Republic, the MPs have not grabbed like for decades. And from July 1st are clearly above the former sound barrier: the federal judge salaries.

Have you never heard of it? That is so wanted. Because what was once considered suddenly a discussion is worth it. The now planned increases are one thing above all: brazen than ever. And that in a phase of bankruptcies, paths, waves of termination and strikes.

Maybe you have to ask it so clearly: someone in parliament still feels?!

In the first order: Among other things, it is an automatism that should suggest the tricky dietary question and prevent debates as in 2008. Since 2016, the recalculation of the diet rates has been on the basis of the average wage development in the country. Since this almost always increases, the remuneration increases almost annually.

Already at this point you have to object: workers fight for higher wages through their personal work success or lengthy industrial straces. The members of the Bundestag, on the other hand, comfortably rely on statistical take -use effects. Many in the country would be grateful if they had to worry about their salaries.

The actual scandal is different: the increase in nominal wages in Germany is not due to the great success of the German economy or the great framework conditions that politics would have created. To a large extent, the one -off payments to compensate for inflation, higher tariff degrees in the public service and the noticeable increases in the minimum wage are responsible for statistical growth.

The money sacks of the MPs are therefore filled primarily because of a politically initiated wage adjustment for the poorest and one -off payments of the state. The latter only gets once, but they end up in the wallet permanently with MPs. That is at least unfair.

The government coalition should therefore voluntarily forego the planned increase in a first step. Parliament had already done that in pandemic.

In a second step, the system should be switched back to a political process: Yes, these diet debates are uncomfortable. But they have to be led in a democracy. In any case, automation for fear of the sovereign is the wrong way. The reward for representatives in particular must be the result of political debate or, as planned before, to be linked to similarly paid jobs.

After all, that would also strengthen the reputation of the politicians and this coalition. Because the increase in diet is a series of broken promises to save from the top.

Suddenly there is a ministry, not, as promised, one less. Even from the State Secretaries there is more than at the traffic light, and also little has remained from the planned deletion of the many representatives of the federal government. And now also the diets?

In her first speech, the new Bundestag president Julia Klöckner had promised to consolidate and save in parliament, so, as she said, with a good example. That would be the right time now. Otherwise the grand coalition (and with them the Greens) sends a devastating signal.

The increase in diet must be stopped. That would be a real change of policy, a real “we understood”.