Federal-state group: They pulled themselves together

A failure of this federal-state round was not an option – all participants agreed on that. Despite some progress, the mood at the meeting was depressed – also because a violation from the Chancellery almost torpedoed the result.

Everything was actually set up for a successful federal-state negotiation. In advance, the Federal Chancellery and state representatives had cleared up almost all the points of contention.

After the experiences of the failed prime ministers’ conference at the beginning of October, the heads of government’s plan was to prove that they were able to act.

Disputes about financing issues boil up again for a short time

But this plan almost failed. In the middle of the preparatory meeting of the Prime Ministers, a paper bursts out of the Federal Chancellery. In the 13-page key issues paper, the federal government explains how it intends to implement electricity and gas price controls.

The problem: On page 11 it says that the federal and state governments each finance half of the hardship regulation for small and medium-sized companies. That’s not agreed. All 16 country heads express their displeasure in statements. You take an unplanned break from reading to put the paper through its paces. Everything is delayed. SPD-led countries speak of an unfortunate action by the chancellor’s office, Union-led countries are outraged.

Because manages to mediate

The countries are also angry because a similar wording appeared in an earlier version of the negotiation paper and was immediately rejected by the state chancellery. The actions of the Chancellery are therefore perceived as foul play. For a brief moment there is the option of reopening all financial issues and renegotiating things that have already been agreed.

But it doesn’t come to that in the end. MPK Chairman Weil is instructed by his colleagues to speak to the Chancellor during the lunch break. In the conversation, Weil manages to get the federal government to move away from its half-funding requirement. The situation is saved for the time being. Weil suggests to his colleagues that the outcome of the negotiations be maintained.

Hardship regulation and housing benefit are depressing the mood

With rumbling stomachs, the prime ministers drive to the chancellery. This is where the joint meeting with the Federal Chancellor begins. Actually, the country heads here have a few reasons to be in a good mood.

The federal government is prepared to accommodate the federal states on many points. Especially when it comes to the costs for refugees and the federal government digs deep into its pockets for public transport. In these points, the countries can feel like winners. But the mood is still depressed.

This is of course also due to the issue of hardship rules. The federal and state governments don’t make it here, to find a new solution. The question is ignored. The federal and state economics ministers are to renegotiate the complex by December 1st.

The agreed half-financing of the extended housing benefit is also depressing the mood. Many countries do not yet know how to handle the personnel costs that arise when there are suddenly millions more people entitled to housing benefit nationwide who all write applications at once.

The timing of the gas price brake is also controversial

The rather moderate mood is also due to the fact that many federal states regret that the federal government has not moved completely on the gas price brake. Although it is a success for the countries that the aim is now for this to take effect as early as February. But many country heads are calling for a continuous relief mechanism from January.

At the meeting, Hamburg therefore proposes simply bringing forward the retroactive effect mechanism from February to January. Because it is assumed that the federal government is also concerned with money at this point, Mayor Tschentscher proposes shortening the desired term of the gas price brake from April 2024 to March 2024. In order to, the Hanseatic city argues, the possible total volume would be the same, but one would have a continuous solution.

The Governing Mayor of Berlin, Giffey, once again appealed to Scholz to agree to such a solution. However, the union refuses. And so it happens that in the end all sides are not one hundred percent satisfied. But they fail, everyone you talk to says, wouldn’t have been an option.