Federal Council President Andreas Bovenschulte speaks in an interview about the consequences of the election in Saxony-Anhalt for the state chamber and corrections to the federal government's reform course.
Andreas Bovenschulte: “Uncertainty is the raw material from which the AfD makes its successes.” Photo: Michael Kappeler/dpa
Berlin. Mr. Bovenschulte, the AfD has 44 percent in Saxony-Anhalt, the SPD has nine. What is the message of this election evening?
This came as a shock to me, as it did to all Democrats. There's nothing to sugarcoat there. Of those who think their own economic situation is bad, two thirds voted for the AfD and practically no one voted for the SPD. The AfD does not have a single solution to our country's problems. On the contrary: For example, she wants to leave the Eurozone, which would cost hundreds of thousands of jobs and dramatically affect people with small and medium incomes. Nevertheless, there is massive support for it.
Why does the AfD succeed what the SPD does not: spread hope?
Uncertainty is the raw material from which the AfD makes its successes. We are currently not experiencing a historic crisis with a 20 percent economic collapse, rapidly increasing mass unemployment and social impoverishment. Nevertheless, many people's concern about what's to come and about their own place in society is apparently so great that they support a party that translates this uncertainty into an aggressive nationalistic narrative of the future. Tenor: With us everything will be different, everything will be better, and we will throw out everyone who does not belong to our definition of a national community. You can't get anywhere with rational arguments alone. We need a positive emotional counter-narrative.
Andreas Bovenschulte
SPD Prime Minister
Andreas Bovenschulte (61) has been mayor of Bremen since 2019. Bovenschulte is considered a party leftist. The doctor of law, born in Hildesheim in 1965, was chairman of the SPD in Bremen from 2010 to 2013. On Wednesday, Bovenschulte was nominated again by the Bremen SPD board as the top candidate for the Bremen state election in May 2027. Bovenschulte is currently also President of the Federal Council, which represents the 16 federal states.
Bovenschulte has been playing the guitar since his youth, he has played rock music and quotes song titles that suit every situation in life. During his studies, the politician with the nickname “Bovi” lived in a shared apartment with his predecessor as mayor of Bremen, Carsten Sieling (SPD). The politician, who is around two meters tall, is the father of two adult daughters.
If the AfD forms a government in Saxony-Anhalt – can it paralyze the Federal Council?
No, that won't happen. We have 16 countries and a constitution that can handle this situation. We have also made the Federal Council's rules of procedure more robust in recent years. But of course: We would then have a new situation in the Federal Council.
To what extent?
With an AfD prime minister, for the first time since the Federal Republic was founded, we would have a head of government in our ranks who rejects the free-democratic basic order.
There is a proposal to cut Saxony-Anhalt's funding from the state financial equalization system if an AfD government there pursues repressive policies. Are you going with me?
I have a clear stance on the AfD. But we do not fight the enemies of democracy by abolishing the rule of law. We are not an arbitrary state, we adhere to law and order. The AfD, however, would not shy away for a single second from making short work of its opponents if it had the opportunity to do so. We all need to be clear about this.
The current head of government, Sven Schulze (CDU), has asked that Saxony-Anhalt not take over the chairmanship of the Prime Minister's Conference in October. Rightly so?
Yes. It is not yet possible to predict who will become Prime Minister and how stable the situation will be. Taking on such an important function in this situation is practically impossible. The Prime Minister's Conference is too important as a coordination body to allow instability there.
You said in June that the federal government had to “take its foot off the gas” when it came to reforms. Do you feel confirmed by the election results in Saxony-Anhalt?
We need reforms, no question. But you can't just announce drastic changes from above, you have to take people with you. Reforms must be perceived as necessary and fair, otherwise they will fail. And that's why we can and must argue about who bears the burden of the changing times. Whether it is right to restructure the budget primarily through cuts in parental allowance, housing benefit and pensions, or whether high incomes and assets must make a greater contribution. After all, we are not an expertocracy, but a democracy.
Does that mean: you want to reverse a large part of the reforms?
No, I want to discuss what makes sense and what doesn't make sense. Let’s take pension reform. The expert commission proposed 33 measures. Only three or four of them are really controversial. Markus Söder is opening up mini-jobs and the CDU prime minister is calling for the abolition of pensions at 63. When it comes to such a fundamental matter, no one can say: the commission has presented something, that's it, no discussion.
Yes, your party leader Bärbel Bas. The pension reform is a “complete work of art” that should not be untied.
But when people say: “After 45 years of hard work, I have done my part, I can no longer do it,” and three quarters of the population reject the abolition of pensions at 63, then we have to react to that.
» Read also: The Union urges, the SPD warns: Are the reforms now shaky?
But according to the Pension Commission, everyone should be able to retire after 45 years if they prove they can no longer do so.
The approach isn't all that wrong. But: It individualizes a social problem and refers those affected to a potentially very lengthy administrative and legal process. That's why I remain skeptical and would basically want to stick with the pension after 45 years of contributions. But I'm also a realist. If the recommendation of the expert commission is followed, at least sufficiently long transition periods will be required.
If all the reforms are now unraveled again, isn't there a risk that compromises will not be made at all?
As I said: we need reforms. But even more important is an economic policy that ensures robust growth and thus increasing tax revenues.
What would be central to this?
Among other things, relief for small and medium incomes.
This is exactly what is not happening under SPD Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil.
This is not happening to a sufficient extent because the Union and the SPD were unable to agree on the counter-financing of a tax reform. My position is clear: If we need more money for our defense, the boomers are retiring and we have to finance the transformation of the economy, then large incomes and wealth must also contribute a larger share.
Finance Minister Klingbeil: Under pressure to reform. Photo: IMAGO/Andreas Gora
High earners contribute more through a higher tax on the rich.
But this does not affect the large fortunes in our country. I think the Union's dogma of protecting such assets is wrong. Not out of resentment, but because in the current difficult situation everyone has to make their contribution according to their ability. In 1952, Konrad Adenauer decided on a 50 percent property levy in order to finance the equalization of the burden for the integration of the displaced. The Union seems to have completely forgotten this. Anyone who invests 100 million euros in government bonds now pays 25 percent tax on the interest. And this means that his tax rate may be lower than the average tax rate of a skilled worker at Mercedes. Nobody understands that.
There are also suggestions from the SPD to examine defense spending more closely. Are you going with me?
We must close our military capability gap, no question about it. That's why we have to spend more on our defense. But here too the question of distribution arises: Whoever ultimately says “guns instead of butter” divides society. In five years, according to budget projections, most federal spending except for defense and interest rates will decline in real terms. Nobody will be able to convey that to voters, not even the Union.
At the Union, the gap between promises and actually financeable tax policy is simply too great.
The Union made election promises that it has already broken: no new debt, lower taxes. Why should the Union continue to approach the SPD?
Because it doesn't work any other way. Relief for small and medium incomes can only be financed by placing greater burdens on high assets and incomes. But it's true: at the Union the gap between promises and actually financeable tax policy is simply too great.
Taxing higher wealth is not even being discussed. Did the SPD leadership negotiate badly?
After a poor election result, we went into government out of political responsibility. Nobody can seriously expect that we, as a smaller partner, will prevail against the Union on all crucial issues.
In Saxony-Anhalt, entry into the state parliament was uncertain. How does your party get out of the crisis?
By getting the economy going again and ensuring that people with small and medium incomes primarily benefit from growth. And by ensuring that the government functions and does a proper job. Many people no longer trust us. And we have to change that.
There is no need for a new party leadership or a separation of party and government offices?
Personnel discussions do not solve the problem. Practically all social democratic parties in Europe are in a similar crisis to the SPD. It's hard to say that our problems are due to person X or Y.
Related topics
AfDSPDSaxony-AnhaltBremenAndreas BovenschulteFederal Council
Bremen is benefiting greatly from the changing times. We can't quite believe our eyes: of all things, a red-green-red Senate is turning Bremen into an “arms boomtown”?
This is not a completely new development, but is rooted in Bremen's industrial history. But it is true: we need more technological and industrial autonomy to ensure our defense and less dependence on the USA. Bremen is happy to contribute to this. Of course, if I had the choice, I would rather invest the money in civilian projects. A euro invested there creates significantly more prosperity.
… but?
We have to close the Bundeswehr's capability gap if we want to ensure our defense. And if that is necessary, then it should also happen in Bremen and Bremerhaven. The port is now being upgraded militarily, procurement for space and sea is coming to Bremen, and Bremen companies in the security and defense sector are hiring hundreds of people. Nevertheless, we must ensure that this development provides significant technological impetus for the civilian economy over the next ten years. The defense sector alone is too small to support a lasting upswing in Germany.
More: “Remigration is synonymous with ethnic cleansing”: The Chancellor faces the victorious AfD
Published according to the editorial standards of the Handelsblatt. You can find more information in our guidelines.
More on the topic of our partners display
remind.me Take advantage of current low electricity/gas prices before prices rise again
