analysis
The FDP parliamentary group in the Bundestag has an idea that could still save the climate money. But the opposition from the Greens came straight away. They only agree on one question.
The fact that a planned payment from the state to the citizens is canceled is no one’s fault. For a few days now, the buck has been with Finance Minister Christian Lindner from the FDP. But their parliamentary group is now calculating how the climate money could still be financed – and is thus passing the buck to Economics Minister Robert Habeck, thus angering the Greens.
But first things first: The climate money is intended to compensate for financial burdens caused by the increased CO2 price. This makes air travel, car journeys and heating more expensive; Anyone who has more money and therefore (statistically) flies more, drives larger cars and heats more rooms also pays more.
The climate money, on the other hand, should be paid out equally to everyone per capita. In this way, money is redistributed from top to bottom, which is intended to promote social acceptance of climate policy. So much for the theory.
Traffic light lacks the funds for climate money
In practice, the CO2 price rose at the turn of the year, but there is still no climate money. On the one hand, this is because a payment mechanism for such a service is still being created.
But also because the money in the Climate and Transformation Fund (KTF), from which the climate money is to be paid, is planned elsewhere. And so Finance Minister Lindner admitted at the weekend what had long been clear to observers: there would be no more climate money in this legislative period.
This announcement resulted in opposition from the SPD and the Greens – and an open letter from 16 associations, including the AWO, the BUND, the NABU, the social association VdK and the consumer advice center. “Many of us supported CO2 pricing on the condition that the amounts paid by citizens would be refunded to private households as climate money […] “It says. “Mr. Minister Lindner: Pay out the climate money during this legislative period.”
FDP wants to cut billions in Habeck’s subsidies
Which brings us back to the buck, which the FDP quickly passed on yesterday. The open letter from the associations was not even a day old when the Bundestag faction presented a paper with billion-dollar savings proposals: 7.5 billion euros could be saved this year, most of it on matters close to the heart of Economics Minister Habeck, including billions in funding Future technologies.
Almost five billion euros are available in subsidies for chip factories alone. FDP parliamentary group deputy Lukas Köhler told “Bild” that in return, 100 euros in climate money per capita could be paid out from 2025 – i.e. 400 euros for a family of four.
Greens are demanding climate money from Lindner
A proposed solution that was immediately rejected by the Greens. Group vice-president Julia Verlinden said this ARD capital studio: “The coalition partner’s demands for cuts in climate transformation projects cause uncertainty in the economy and prevent planning security.”
Climate money and investments in competitiveness are not an “either-or” option. Of course, both could be paid for if the finance minister is willing to create new leeway in the federal budget, says Verlinden.
The FDP doesn’t want to know anything about this. Their climate policy spokesman, Olaf in der Beek, sees his party friend Lindner as only responsible for the disbursement mechanism for the climate money and refers to the FDP paper with the savings proposals. “The financial side must be clarified by the Federal Minister of Economics using funds from the KTF,” said Beek ARD capital studio. In plain language: Habeck should cut subsidies.
Habeck has other priorities than climate money
But the billions for the establishment of semiconductor producers and the climate-friendly restructuring of the economy are sacred to the Minister of Economic Affairs. If in doubt, he would rather forego the climate money.
This became clear again on Wednesday afternoon during a survey in the Bundestag. Habeck pointed out several times and as he has often done before that the federal government had already relieved the population of the increased CO2 prices – namely by the fact that the billion-dollar EEG levy is no longer paid by electricity customers, but by the state.
The FDP man in the Beek has little use for this argument. For him, climate money and the elimination of the EEG levy are two different things. “The climate money is intended to strengthen acceptance of increasing CO2 pricing. It’s not a matter of either/or, but rather that the measures complement each other.”
The Green group really wants climate money
And for Habeck’s green parliamentary group – unlike the minister – climate money is not a nice-to-have. “The climate money has to come in this election period. It is an important fairness project of the traffic light, which at the same time cushions burdens and rewards climate-friendly behavior,” says Julia Verlinden.
As counter-financing, she suggests reforming “climate-damaging subsidies”. “For example, a change in large, expensive and gas-guzzling company cars for high earners is long overdue.”
The FDP has repeatedly and clearly rejected this. The traffic light factions may agree on their desire for climate money – but when it comes to financing, they are worlds apart.