Traffic light plans
“Bürgergeld” is supposed to replace Hartz IV – but what is the difference?
The SPD, the Greens and the FDP are striving for coalition talks after the explorations have been concluded. SPD Chancellor candidate Olaf Scholz announced on Friday, together with the party leaders of the three parties, the agreement on a twelve-page exploratory paper, which includes, among other things, the rejection of tax increases and the relaxation of the debt brake as well as “super write-offs for climate protection investments”. “And from the perspective that I want to formulate for myself, that is also a very good result. It makes it clear that a government can be formed in Germany that wants to ensure that we achieve progress. Progress that is possible and necessary in many, many areas of our social development, our economic development and also with regard to the tasks that we have as a country in Europe. ” All three parties emphasized the necessary investments. It was also decided to increase the minimum wage to twelve euros. And all three parties praised the trusting negotiations over the past few days. Greens co-boss Robert Habeck is optimistic: “It is the dynamics and not so much the intersections that have been explored that are hoping that great things can actually be achieved.” Green co-leader Annalena Baerbock agrees: “So that we not only continue to pursue politics in this country based on the lowest common denominator, but also ensure a real renewal in a progressive coalition, it was important that three different parties agree Understanding that everyone gives something, FDP boss Christian Lindner also describes the atmosphere as very positive: “From my point of view, I want to emphasize that there are clear financial guard rails that ensure the sustainability of public finances with respect for the Connect the limits of people’s resilience. Prospects for relief, for example in the area of electricity costs, are also shown. Secondly, we have outlined a program for the de-bureaucratisation and unleashing of our country so that private and public projects become possible again. “The exploratory paper that has now been agreed summarizes the results of the explorations so far and is intended to form the basis for the coalition talks A vote of the state council has to be obtained on Sunday, and the party executive has to give the green light for the SPD and the committees for the FDP.
The SPD, Greens and FDP want to replace the previous basic security with a “citizen’s money”. But does that really mean the abolition of Hartz IV – or is it just a new name?
Since its introduction in 2005, “Hartz IV” has not only become a synonym for poverty in Germany. The system of basic security with its sanctions and other bureaucratic nasties is also seen by many as degrading, which is why critics have long been calling for it to be abolished.
Now it could really be that far soon. The negotiators from the SPD, Greens and FDP have stated in their exploratory paper that they want to leave Hartz IV behind and introduce a new system. Literally it says in the paper: “Instead of the previous basic security we will be a citizen’s benefit introduce. Citizens’ money should respect the dignity of the individual, enable them to participate in society and be digitally and easily accessible. “
Is it really the end of Hartz IV?
But is it really the abolition of the Hartz IV system that the traffic light parties are striving for here? Or will the whole thing just be given a new name and nothing else will change, as many commentators on Twitter fear?
Of course, there are not too many details about the plans of the possibly soon government at this point in time. But some points emerge unmistakably from the few sentences that the exploratory paper provides on the subject.
Bürgergeld is not a basic income
It is clear that the desired citizen benefits should not be an unconditional basic income that every citizen receives regardless of income and assets. Such a revolution was not expected in view of the election programs. But the weaker variant of a basic income with a means test does not seem to be envisaged either. It would be conceivable that current Hartz IV recipients will receive a basic income in the future, but remain exempt from all currently applicable rights and obligations.
That is obviously not what the citizens’ money amounts to. Because in the exploratory paper it is said that the citizens’ money should “focus on helping people return to the labor market”. Citizens’ money is therefore not primarily intended to ensure that you live on it in the long term, but is intended to offer incentives to earn your own money again – as is currently the case.
Sanctions are likely to remain
One of the most violent points of criticism of Hartz IV – the controversial sanctions – should not go away. At the moment, Hartz IV recipients who show themselves to be uncooperative can painfully shorten the benefits. The exploratory paper now says: “We are sticking to our obligations to cooperate and are examining how we can reduce bureaucracy here.” Ultimately, however, an obligation to cooperate can only be enforced with sanctions. It remains to be seen what will improve here for those affected by “reducing bureaucracy”.
What should change then?
So it will probably remain with a basic security with sanctions, but what should change? There is not too much about this in the narrow paragraph of the exploratory paper. The prospect is that “generous regulations on safe assets and for checking the size of the apartment”, which applied in the corona crisis, could be continued – or that this will at least be checked. Conversely, this also means that assets and apartment size will not be completely irrelevant, but will probably continue to be part of a needs test.
In contrast, the paper does not mention that generally higher standard rates are strived for. Mentioning “dignity” and “participation in society” could be an indication of this, but it does not have to be. Because Hartz IV must already fulfill these criteria from a formal and legal point of view. The explorers only make a commitment that the opportunities for additional income should be improved, “with the aim of increasing incentives for gainful employment”. This addresses the problem that it is sometimes not worthwhile for Hartz IV recipients to earn something, as the earnings beyond certain allowances are offset against social benefits.
So is this the abolition of Hartz IV by the traffic light parties? The bottom line is that the exploratory paper does not really reveal what the new citizens’ money is basically supposed to do better than the previous system. But we may know more if the concept makes it into a red-green-yellow coalition agreement.