It’s about the climate on this Wednesday in the state parliament. But also about the sovereignty of interpretation, maybe even above all. The question of where Bavaria actually stands in the ranking of the most climate-friendly federal states. Prime Minister Markus Söder (CSU) rams in a couple of pegs. “Woodland number one”, “German champion” in solar energy, “number one in charging stations” for electric cars. Yes, well, says Söder, “we can do more with the wind. But we’re still in eighth place, ahead of Baden-Württemberg”.
So Baden-Württemberg. That is the reference value in Söder’s government declaration on climate protection, it becomes clear after a few minutes. It is an appearance that is charged with expectations. The deadly flash floods of the past few days are a “warning and wake-up call,” says Söder at the beginning of his speech in the state parliament. He will present 50 measures, sorted under five headings: renewable energies, natural CO₂ storage, building, mobility and research. He wants to pay one billion euros into climate protection in 2022, and by 2040 there will be a total of 22 billion. He knows “no federal state that invests so much in these questions”.
Here the Prime Minister, who describes Bavaria as the number one climate region, there the opposition, which is largely in agreement that there is room for improvement in Söders Klimaland. It’s a showdown, especially between the CSU and the Greens. Climate protection, says Söder, should not be an “elite project for the wealthy” – which corresponds to the rhetorical line of battle that the CSU agreed on in the federal election campaign against the Greens. “I don’t believe the ban is the panacea for the solution,” he says. Don’t ban cars, but make engines climate-friendly. Do not ban flights, but research synthetic kerosene. These are Söder’s messages. Nobody should play off climate protection and prosperity against each other. It takes a “combination of attitude and reason”.
Söder speaks for almost three quarters of an hour. Then it’s Ludwig Hartmann’s turn, parliamentary group leader of the Greens, which Söder probably places in the “attitude” category. “I know that you like to make country comparisons. You can do that. But then you should also do them honestly,” says Hartmann in the direction of the government bank, where Söder has now moved. For example the charging stations, Bavaria is not number one at all. Baden-Württemberg has 199 charging points per 1000 square kilometers, Bavaria 120. It depends on the size of the federal states, says Hartmann, not on the number of charging points. Later, the CSU parliamentary group leader Thomas Kreuzer will continue the battle of interpretation. It is not the size that matters, but the number of cars, and Baden-Württemberg has fewer because fewer inhabitants, says Kreuzer. Everything else is campaigning for a “one-topic party”.
That, too, is what complicates the climate debate: that everyone always uses the arithmetic method that puts their own politics in the best light. But what exactly is the climate policy of this state government? And is there a common line at all? Sometimes it sounds like Söder has to seek support from his own CSU. For example when he describes climate protection as a “very conservative and early Christian concern”.
Much had been said about the agreement with the coalition partner in the days leading up to the government declaration. A declaration that should be the foundation for a new Bavarian climate protection law. While Environment Minister Thorsten Glauber (Free Voters) would have preferred to present a finished draft law allegedly drafted by his ministry weeks ago, Prime Minister Söder left it with key data on Wednesday – and marked out the area more extensively. The environment minister has “a central role”, but ultimately climate protection also affects other ministries: economy, construction, transport, agriculture. It is about the “team spirit”, says Söder, “everything is interlinked and gives a uniform climate strategy”.
Ludwig Hartmann sees it a little differently with the uniformity in the governing coalition – and rolls it over with joy. “You have a conflict in your own government here,” said the Green to Söder, “that is not leadership strength.” Christoph Skutella (FDP) puts it even more directly: “Bavaria is top, Bavaria is a pioneer. I ask myself: in what? I’ll tell you: in contradictions.” It is like this: CSU Prime Minister Söder would like to have solar compulsory for newly built houses, FW Economics Minister Hubert Aiwanger is against it. The FW would like to overturn the 10-H distance rule for wind turbines, the CSU is sticking to it. On Wednesday, Söder announced a gentle relaxation of the controversial 10-H rule. And with solar energy, for example, he formulates the goal of quadrupling photovoltaic systems on state roofs.
FW parliamentary group leader Florian Streibl does not speak with a single sentence about internal sensitivities of the state government. In the debate following Söder’s declaration, he chooses an overarching, almost pathetic approach. He speaks of the “home planet” as a “common house” and the task of preserving this house “in its beauty and diversity”. An eager nod from the Prime Minister, Söder nods for almost half a minute, without a break. It is important, says Streibl, “to strike new strong threads in the web of life” – the state government is doing that now.
For the SPD parliamentary group leader Florian von Brunn, “it is not enough” what Söder presented in his speech. Among other things, he lacks the “climate-friendly mobility turnaround” and the strengthening of the municipalities, “because climate protection is done locally”. In general, the SPD is about the “socio-ecological turnaround” – here the CSU discredits itself, if only because of the Union’s election program with tax relief for higher earners. FDP parliamentary group leader Martin Hagen finds German climate policy on the whole too “fragmented, expensive and inefficient”. Söder continued “this wrong track in Bavaria seamlessly”. Single-handedly making a federal state climate-neutral by 2040 is “purely symbolic politics without any effect on the global climate”. The FDP relies on European emissions trading with a fixed CO₂ limit on all sectors. AfD parliamentary group leader Katrin Ebner-Steiner calls it “shabby” to “instrumentalize” the “latest tragedy” for a climate agenda; she advocates nuclear power and coal for the transition.
Unlike Söder, who wants to renegotiate the coal phase that has been decided after the federal election. He would like to check whether “an exit from coal is not possible any faster”. The previous goal, the year 2038, is “unambitious”. Söder announces that he will again campaign for an exit by 2030. And he recommends that the other federal states do an internship in the climate region of Bavaria, specifically in organic farming. There, says Söder, is the Free State, surprise: in first place. Everyone who “talks about our agriculture in other federal states should come here and do an internship”. Green parliamentary leader Hartmann knows how to counter this: “I would offer you an apprenticeship in Baden-Württemberg, with the Green Prime Minister.”