Alexander
Gauland
Corona
Crisis
German
Bundestag, March 25, 2020, Plenarprotokoll 19/154, pp. 19121-19122
[Alexander Gauland is honorary national
chairman of the Alternative für Deutschland and a chairman of the AfD
delegation in the Bundestag.]
Herr
President. Ladies and gentlemen.
First
of all: The government’s policy contains many insights which we hold to be
correct and which we share. Thus, the borders can be defended and we shall on
occasion remind the government of that. In the crisis, the nation is seen in
the democratic nation-state and its management ability. European cooperation
can expand it but not replace it. That also means that German interests must be
protected, as the government has correctly done in the case of the attempt to
subject a German firm to American control.
Standing
together is now the first duty of the citizens. Therefore, we will largely vote
for the financial measures and the legal alterations if these are put forward
on a temporary basis and remain limited to the duration of the Corona
emergency. The adjournment of the parliament we however do not want. The specifics
will be presented by colleague Boehringer.
Ladies
and gentlemen, this vote however does not mean that we will refrain until the
ending of the crisis from naming the failures made by the government from the
start and discussing them in this house. Entry controls came too late and the
stocking of masks and disposable gloves was obviously insufficient. I cite as
one for all the chairman of the medical board association of Hamburg who
complained that the protective equipment for doctors in the Hansestadt is
becoming scarce. Quote: “For weeks we desperately attempted to purchase
anywhere in the world protective equipment, which was almost impossible.” The
Federal government had promised to help, yet “Nothing has arrived. We haven’t
got one, single mask.”
In
this regard, in the year 2012, the Robert Koch Institute presented a detailed
catastrophe scenario of which the Federal government expressly informed this
parliament, this house. Therein is played out a pandemic of a Modi-SARS virus
from Asia which arrives in Germany. I cite:
The symptoms are fever and dry coughing. Most
patients have difficulty
breathing, x-rays indicate alterations in the lungs…
Thus
it says in the paper.
Children and young people generally have a lighter
course of illness with a mortality of 1%, while the mortality for those over 65
years is 50%
That
was discussed in this house.
That is the exact description of the consequences
of Covid-19. The
crisis scenario was known since 2012. The paper prognosticated thousands of deaths. Why were there no sufficient precautionary measures?
Yet,
ladies and gentlemen, what matters – I also know it – is less the past than the
future and there we are lacking a plan of the Federal government, Herr
Minister, for the period of three months. The powerful effort, which – if everything
is taken together – amounts to a total of more than 700 billion euros, is
undefined and as little durable as the shutdown of a entire society. Beyond the
presently decreed contact ban, there then remains only the going-out stoppage
and when a southern German Minister-president, who conducts himself a little
like a pro-consul, has gladly done such a thing then today must the social
consequences be considered. There is no sense in reducing the number of Corona
deaths at the cost of potential victims of suicide.
Thus,
what is the master plan of the Federal government? What will people say when in
three months there is still no All-Clear, Herr Minister? What alternatives are
there to the present course and when does the Federal government think these
might be indicated?
Ladies
and gentlemen, the people have angst – rightly so. More than money is required
to relieve this angst, namely, a strategy which extends beyond the next two or
three months.
I
am grateful.
[Translated by Todd Martin]
