German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/191, pp. 24117-24118.
Many thanks. – Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.
The bill for the re-development of restructuring and
insolvency law, the draft of which the Federal government presents here for a
first reading, shall on one hand be the big shot which opens to us the entirely
new universe of the pre-insolvency restructuring of businesses. On the other
hand, everything having to do with this law shall once again proceed all too
quickly. In the coming weeks, for all that, we will be able to conduct an
experts hearing. For its evaluation there will nevertheless scarcely be time,
since this law shall unquestionably be passed this year and enter into effect
January 1.
Now then, what is in the draft? Essentially, an entirely
new, creative bill for the stabilization and restructuring framework for
businesses; in brief, StaRUG; besides which, however, is also the alteration
of numerous other laws, not least of which is the order of insolvency. To be
brief in regards the areas here put forward, I must limit myself to three short
remarks: One on the fundamentals, one on the StaRUG and one on the order of
insolvency.
On the fundamentals: Unfortunately, I must again this time
come to speak of my Carthage which lies in Brussels. For this draft law contains,
like so many, the note “Tina”: “There is no alternative”, or in German: “To the
implementation of the guidelines’ requirements, there is no alternative.”
The material law of insolvency, which for long underlay our
own legislation, has meanwhile been taken in by the EU – so far, only in the
form of a guideline which still allows us some large-scale leeway for design. Yet
the increase of the EU’s regulatory dicta, and thereby the shrinking of our
self-determined legislation, is foreseeable.
If a criticism of the Herr Bundestag-president expressed
here by one of the AfD members in the Bundestag was “destructive of the state”,
as was recently advertised by the Federal Interior Minister, then it is no
doubt a question of projection. Since the destruction of the state is not done
by us of the AfD, but indeed rather by the majority delegations of this house
who joyfully applaud any EU grab of the legislative competences of the German Bundestag
and thereby transform the German Republic into a kind of Potemkinesque play
parliament.
Canan
Bayram (Greens): This is a political insolvency which you put forward here!
Sebastian
Steineke (CDU/CSU): It would have been better not to speak here!
So much for the fundamentals. What now shall the StaRUG
produce? It shall furnish a framework for the attempt to refrain from initially
commencing the insolvency of a business which is already in the preliminary stage
of a restructuring of the business’s obligations. The aim is thus clearly a
sensible one. Restructuring is thereby according to all precepts a re-writing [Umschreibung] so that the creditors
renounce a portion of their demands. Where that is agreed to by all those
affected, after a weighing of their interests, that is not problem. That,
however, is not always the case and therefore shall only be possible by the
majority acceptance of the creditors.
The rights of a single creditor…will thus be infringed. In
certain cases, that might need to be justified. Yet at the least, it requires
that the individual concerned be able to sensibly protect his rights in this
procedure.
In regards, for example, the acceptance period in §21 of the StaRUG draft
which at a minimum shall amount to only 14 days, there by all means can be doubt.
To this and to additional points, the hearing will hopefully bring additional
attention.
On the insolvency order. The presented draft law shall not
in fact, as was to be feared following remarks by the CDU/CSU delegation, entirely
abolish the basis of insolvency of the over-indebted. Yet it still weakens it
an additional time. We reject this. The avoidance of a business insolvency is –
where possible – clearly desirable. It is not, on the other hand, sensible to
only postpone it for as long as possible. By means of a further weakening of
the insolvency basis of over-indebtedness, the number of zombie firms will only
increase – which in the end, if the insolvency then finally occurs, only inflicts
even so greater damages. Here, we should not pursue the previous mal-development,
but instead take counter-measures.
Many thanks and until next week.
[trans: tem]
