Initiator Dieren on SPD members’ request: “Governing must not be an end in itself”

Mr Dieren, you want the SPD to vote on the 2025 budget. What do you hope to achieve from this?
This is a clear signal that the SPD as a whole will not approve any budget cuts. Society is currently dominated by enormous uncertainty. Cutting costs in the welfare state or infrastructure now would only lead to more uncertainty. The vote will enable all SPD members to express this stance.

They are calling for more “pure SPD” in the traffic light coalition, a change of course that is also reflected in the budget Why do you think that the Chancellor’s party is neglected?
This is not about gaining points for a single party, but about what the end result will be for society. The SPD’s job is to represent the interests of working people and the interests of all those who depend on solidarity.

“The SPD will not approve a budget that cuts our future”

However, fewer and fewer voters are buying that.
That is unfortunately true. Many people no longer have the impression that the SPD is really serious about representing their interests. The bitter result of the EU elections showed that. Are we ruining our democracy with austerity – or are we investing in the future? That is what this budget is about. I want to invest in the future, and so does the SPD. The vote should underline how serious we are about this.

The vote can also be seen as a kind of vote of no confidence in the Chancellor and the SPD party leadership, who are, after all, responsible for the course and image of your party. Right?
No, there is agreement on that. Social Democratic government members, parliamentary group leaders and party leaders leave no doubt about where we stand in these budget negotiations: the SPD will not approve a budget that cuts our future.

If this is so clear, why the members’ vote?
To underline that not only the party leadership represents this clear stance – but the entire SPD.

They call for investments instead of cuts in areas such as Education and affordable housing, otherwise your party would not be able to agree to the budget. A clear statement, but one that could make compromise more difficult. Why further restrict the Chancellor’s room for maneuver?
That doesn’t make a compromise any easier, that’s true. But there are good and bad compromises. We are in a social crisis situation that does not allow for cuts. Otherwise, frustration, anger and disappointment will grow. That only plays into the hands of the right. A compromise that allows that is not just a little less good. It is bad for democracy, bad for our future. That is why I very much hope that the FDP will move away from its blocking stance.

“Then the coalition as a whole is in question”

If in doubt, does the SPD have to risk breaking up the coalition – or even actively withdraw?
The lowest criterion for the SPD’s participation in government must be whether it succeeds in ensuring greater social justice – for the traffic light coalition, whether it is actually a “progressive coalition”. We have now reached a crossroads.

Will the budget decide whether the traffic light oath holds?
If we cannot find a common path on the budget, the coalition as a whole will be called into question. Governing cannot be an end in itself, not even for the SPD.

To request membership, you first need around 4,000 supporters from ten sub-districts. You have already convinced the Jusos. Who else?
We’re getting positive feedback from many SPD branches and are currently in talks. I can’t say more than that. So far, the Jusos are involved, but we’re sure to get the 4,000 votes together.

Shock after EU elections
“We need a plan B”: A wild scenario is circulating in the SPD

13.06.2024

And what happens next?
If the government presents a draft budget on July 3 that does not include any cuts, then our members’ petition will have achieved its purpose – that would be gratifying, but not foreseeable at the moment. We now have four weeks to collect the 4,000 votes. Then, according to the SPD statute, a second stage follows: within three months we would have to win over 20 percent of members as supporters, i.e. around 75,000 people. If this mark is also reached, the party executive will decide: it can adopt the members’ petition or let the entire party vote.

Sounds like a lengthy process. As things stand, the 2025 budget is to be approved by the traffic light coalition in the Bundestag in winter. Will you even be able to get a vote by then?
That depends on the dynamics of the debate. The party executive would have to organize and initiate the vote of all members. That could happen sooner or later, depending on how much the issue mobilizes.

Let us assume that there is a grassroots vote in which the majority rejects the 2025 budget: Is the vote binding in any way?
Our members’ request would then be a political decision of the party. In the end, however, it is neither the SPD executive nor the party base that decides on the budget, but the members of the Bundestag as budget legislators. No one can dictate how they vote.

“The political signal is crucial”

So, to put it bluntly: is it all just symbolic politics?
Well, according to this argument, everything that parties decide on is symbolic politics – because none of it is legally binding. The political signal is crucial. If the SPD executive committee makes a unanimous decision, it is very rare that the SPD parliamentary group in the Bundestag decides the exact opposite. Nevertheless, the Basic Law states that members of parliament are only subject to their conscience. No decision by the party executive committee can have any “binding effect” legally, but it can have a political effect.

You are considering further member requests, such as a 15 euro minimum wage and a nationwide rent cap, in order to mobilize SPD members again. Has the grassroots been given too little attention by the party leadership?
Every member can get involved in a party. There are various ways to do this, whether at the local association or at the party conference. However, member requests are also provided for in exceptional situations – and we are in such a situation now. That is why we want to bring more dynamism to the discussion on other pressing problems. The result of the EU elections was a deep blow for many in the SPD. The answer to this should be clear.

A look into the past shows that member votes can cause considerable unrest and disputes. Can the SPD use this in its current situation?
£With the members’ request on the budget issue, we do not want to achieve a position that does not exist yet. There is consensus in the party, not a dispute. We have to show that the SPD wants to represent the interests of the people. And it is really serious about this position.