Status: 11/21/2022 03:13 am
This week, a compromise is to be found in the dispute over citizen income – and the social reform is to come through the Federal Council. But CDU Vice Linnemann makes it clear: his party expects “fundamental” changes to the government’s plans.
The CDU deputy leader Carsten Linnemann has called on the federal government to fundamentally revise its plans for citizen income. Otherwise there will be no compromise in the Bundesrat: “The citizen’s allowance is about a directional decision. If the direction of the traffic light coalition does not change, a compromise will not succeed,” Linnemann told the editorial network Germany (RND). The principle of promoting and demanding must also be retained in the case of citizen income.
The citizens’ benefit, which is to replace Hartz IV from the new year, had passed the Bundestag with the votes of the governing coalition, but failed in the Bundesrat because of the state governments with Union participation. The mediation committee is expected to find a compromise on Wednesday. According to the will of the federal government, the Bundesrat and Bundestag should then adopt the compromise on Friday. However, whether this will work is an open question.
Child Protection Association: No sanctions against families
The President of the Child Protection Association, Heinz Hilgers, also demanded that there should be no sanctions against families with children. “It should generally be forbidden for families with children to receive financial sanctions,” Hilgers told RND. “Most of the time, the sanctions don’t hit those who sit at the train station in the morning with a beer bottle. Children suffer the most from the sanctions.”
The Union and the governing parties should end their “games” and decide on citizen income as planned by the traffic lights, said Hilgers. “A lack of agreement would primarily harm families and children.”
Dispute over asset limits and sanctions
In the traffic light plans for citizen income, the Union is particularly concerned about the rules on so-called protective assets and fewer sanction options. The Union finds that the assets that should not be counted towards the citizen’s income are too high.
The FDP, on the other hand, says that this should prevent the self-employed who are temporarily receiving citizen benefits from having to use up their old-age provision. In addition, the CDU and CSU miss opportunities to impose sanctions on people receiving citizenship benefits who do not cooperate with the job centers.