The record is more than 70 years old and it won’t be broken this time either. From 1946 to 1950, in the first freely elected state parliament after the Nazi dictatorship, there were eleven investigative committees. More than ever before in an election period in the Bavarian Parliament. At that time, the investigation reports were still written in old German script, which is not so easy to read for many people today.
In the current legislative period, which ends in a year, there are currently two committees of inquiry. But that doesn’t mean that there’s little to explain. Parliament is particularly concerned with the mask affairs of the CSU and their ties in the Free State. It has become quiet about the other sub-committee, which is once again dealing with the murders of the right-wing extremist NSU. But there will probably be at least one other sub-committee. The traffic light opposition from the Greens, SPD and FDP actually agree on this. The three factions disagree, however, as to what should be clarified: the billions in price increases for the Munich S-Bahn. Or the events surrounding the costly museum project in Nuremberg.
The FDP favors an underground committee on the high costs of the “Future Museum” in Nuremberg, a branch of the Munich-based Deutsches Museum. The FDP scoffed at Prime Minister Markus Söder’s pet project in his Franconian homeland, saying it was a “science fiction museum”. Bavaria’s Supreme Court of Auditors (ORH) has already criticized the high rental costs. They are estimated by the ORH at around 200 million in 25 years.
Söder is preventing the investigation, says Körber
The opposition senses even further CSU felt. Because companies of the Nuremberg real estate entrepreneur Gerd Schmelzer, who benefits from the state rental costs in his Augustinerhof, are said to have donated a total of 45,000 euros to the CSU after the bid for the future museum. CSU and Schmelzer deny a connection between the donation and the museum.
Söder’s government is preventing comprehensive clarification, says FDP member of parliament Sebastian Körber. He is the chairman of the building committee in Parliament. Körber claims that many people in the Free State have the feeling that something is wrong. “A committee of inquiry must therefore urgently clarify whether many millions of taxpayers’ money were wasted here.” Given the manageable number of files and witnesses, such an underground committee, Körber believes, could be completed before the next state elections in the autumn of next year.
The Greens could also gain something from a U-committee on the Nuremberg Museum. Above all, because real estate transactions in the Free State are often influenced via CSU channels. “We keep seeing questionable behavior in rental and purchase decisions by the Free State,” says Florian Siekmann, deputy leader of the Greens parliamentary group. The museum in Nuremberg is a “deterrent example”.
The traffic expert of the Greens in the state parliament, Markus Büchler, is also very interested in clarifying the disaster on the second main line of the Munich S-Bahn. It could cost up to 7.2 billion euros, almost twice as much as last planned. And it won’t be finished until 2037, much later than planned.
Büchler objects that the amounts involved are larger than in the Future Museum in Nuremberg. According to him, the Greens want to “finally discuss” which sub-committee they think is right. And then approach the SPD and FDP to jointly push through another body in parliament in the fall. Nothing works without the Greens. They make up the largest faction in the traffic light opposition, the FDP the smallest. In between lies the SPD.
Their parliamentary group and country leader Florian von Brunn would probably like to tackle both issues. Brunn says that with the museum in Nuremberg, Söder “wanted to erect a monument at the expense of the taxpayer, breaking all the rules”. This must be “definitely investigated further”. From Brunn’s point of view, this also applies to the second main line of the Munich S-Bahn. This is developing more and more into a kind of “Berlin Airport of the CSU,” says the SPD leader. Due to a planning and construction disaster, the capital airport Berlin-Brandenburg was only completed many years later and became much more expensive than planned; which caused much ridicule. The airport is named after former Chancellor and SPD leader Willy Brandt.
A committee for both issues was discarded
What now? S-Bahn or museum? Or even both? Greens, SPD and FDP want to discuss and decide on this in the near future. Several aspects play a role here. Which rejects can be processed in the remaining time, with what effort and how quickly. And of course: Which topic harms the CSU the most. In both cases, the focus is on prominent CSU people, especially Söder. The government partner of the CSU, the Free Voters around party leader and Economics Minister Hubert Aiwanger, have little to fear on either issue.
In the meantime, there have even been considerations in opposition circles to undertake both projects in a joint committee of inquiry. Under the bracket that it is about mismanagement of large projects. The traffic light opposition is said to have moved away from this. Also, because such a connection would be more of an artificial nature.
A leading opposition politician believes that the U-committee on the museum will definitely come. In his estimation, the state parliament could overdo it with the S-Bahn in the time remaining until the election. The second main line of the Munich S-Bahn has been discussed and planned for decades. According to opposition circles, anyone who wanted to examine this project would have to study vast amounts of files and hear several dozen witnesses. Unless, when clarifying the debacle, one would limit oneself to the cost increases in recent years.
The first two U-committees in this election period on the masks, including further CSU felt, and on the NSU murders are still running anyway. The mask committee in particular still has a lot of work ahead of it. From the point of view of the CSU, that is certainly enough. The ruling party presumably has no need for further U-committees. In the case of the S-Bahn, the party and the government are primarily blaming the client, Deutsche Bahn, for the disaster. And when visiting the future museum, Söder himself said months ago that the money was “well invested”. The criticism from the Greens, SPD and FDP is even dismissed as “smear theater” in the CSU.