Commentary on the coalition committee: pragmatism instead of ideology

In their marathon negotiations, the SPD, Greens and FDP had to find pragmatic solutions. They have also succeeded in doing so in the areas of transport, heating and climate targets.

Instead of ideology, now pragmatism. Because that’s the only way it can work when partners with very different worldviews want to achieve something together. The traffic light shows it in its decision paper – 16 pages long. Especially when it comes to climate protection and transport policy.

There is, for example, the dispute that has been going on for months about the accelerated expansion of motorways. Until recently, this was unthinkable for the Greens for environmental and climate protection reasons, but imperative for the FDP because people and the economy in Germany should remain mobile.

Orientated to needs

The compromise that has now been reached overcomes the absolute determination of both parties and is based on actual needs. Where there is really pressure, where an additional motorway lane helps to reduce traffic jams and avoid long detours, planning and construction are now being accelerated. There should be a total of 144 projects. Hundreds of thousands of road users say “thank you”.

In principle, the expansion of railway lines should also be faster. This is not only in the interests of rail customers, but above all good for the reduction of CO2 and thus a real opportunity. Especially since energy is also generated via photovoltaic systems that are to be installed on the new routes.

Don’t be released from duty

Pragmatism also in the second example, the so-called sector targets. It is about the CO2 savings in the departments of the respective ministers. The problem: It was actually clear to everyone involved that this goal cannot currently be achieved in the transport sector. And that’s how it happened. This is also due to the fact that the mobility turnaround cannot be organized as quickly as “Fridays for Future” would like.

The FDP and SPD have prevailed here. However, their joy should be limited, because that does not mean they are relieved of their duty. In the future, the development of individual sectors will be reviewed every two years. What matters more is whether the federal government as a whole achieves the goals it has set itself. A pragmatic approach.

Big ideological differences

And then there is the third example: the controversial law on the use of climate-friendly heating systems. From 2024, if possible, every heating system that has to be newly installed should be operated with 65 percent renewable energies. In principle, this requirement also applies after the 30-hour coalition committee. However, there are exceptions and hardship regulations, extended deadlines and money from the state for those who simply cannot afford it. So pragmatism here too.

The traffic light dispute over the past few months has once again made it clear that there are major ideological differences between the Greens and the FDP. That’s not bad. Perhaps the coalition representatives are right when they say that the issues that are being discussed intensively within the government are those that are also causing heated feelings among the population. And that is precisely why it is right for the government to find less ideological and more pragmatic solutions.