Members’ pensions: based on the reality of the voters

Ordinary employees can only dream of pension schemes for members of the Bundestag. Reform is necessary if the representatives of the people do not want to lose touch with their voters.

Politicians cut corners everywhere – just not with themselves. That is the common cliché about our parliamentarians. Efforts have been made with every increase in diet in the past.

So if five members of the Bundestag from almost all parliamentary groups are now calling for a reform of their own pensions in a joint declaration, then they can expect widespread attention. Especially since the five are calling for the electoral privilege to be abolished – namely that the state pays for the old-age security of outgoing parliamentarians and the parliamentarians themselves do not pay anything for it.

A maximum of around 6500 euros retirement benefits – per month

For example, the pension after four years in the German Bundestag, i.e. one electoral term, is 1,000 euros per month. That doesn’t sound too dramatic – but a comparison with the pension for ordinary employees shows the dimension: For a pension of 1,000 euros, you have to work for almost 30 years, based on an average wage.

The difference is even more drastic for long-standing MPs: Anyone who has been in the Bundestag for 27 years – there are such cases – receives more than 6500 euros in old-age benefits. A month, mind you. No employee, no matter how well earning, can even come close to such a pension in the statutory pension.

There are quite experienced members of the German Bundestag who have now wondered whether such ample support from parliamentarians can still be publicly communicated. And whether it can remain that the state alone pays their pension – or whether those affected should not also contribute to their security in old age.

Reform with a sense of proportion is necessary

Now MPs are not normal workers. The Basic Law already requires that elected officials should decide freely and without pressure – that is, without too much financial dependency. Thats alright. A reform of the pensions of MPs must take this into account and therefore be done with a sense of proportion.

Nevertheless, Parliament, which in the past has become bigger and more expensive anyway, should base its members’ salaries on the general development of wages and pensions. Because if MPs are actually supposed to be representatives of the people, then they must not completely detach themselves from the economic reality of the vast majority of their voters.