Friday, July 23, 2021

Kristin Brinker, June 17, 2021, Electricity in Berlin

Berlin Abgeordnetenhaus, Plenarprotokoll 18/81, pp. 9470-9472.

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

We are today debating a sum of two billion euros – two billion euros which the State of Berlin shall pay for the electricity grid [Stromnetz]. This large scale alone self-evidently justifies the current affairs hour here today.

The Stromnetz Berlin GmbH for 130 years manages the electricity grid in Berlin with electrical lines laid mostly underground, transformer stations, and de-centralized energy generation. It is their duty to secure the electricity supply of all Berliners, of the businesses of Berlin, as well as of the public lighting, and it is responsible for the maintenance and renewal of the technical investment. These duties have been reliably carried out by the Stromnetz Berlin GmbH as a Vattenfall subsidiary to the present day.

The coalition now wants to socialize [verstaatlichen] this functioning, private enterprise for the reason that the electricity grid serves the public interest [Daseinsvorsorge], similar to the Berlin water works [Wasserbetriebe]. Colleague Stroedter has just referred to the Berlin water works; they will be gladly included as a chief witness of how a successful socialization can ensue.

Nevertheless, the comparison limps if one knows the history of the Berlin water works; thereto a brief digression: In 1999, under the SPD finance senator Fugmann-Heesing, the Berlin water works were partially privatized. Why? – The 1.7 billion euros in revenues at that time should serve to restore the Berlin State budget. Nevertheless, a result of the deal were secret pacts contractually guaranteeing returns of eight percent for private investors RWE and Veolia and increasing water prices of more than 30 percent at the cost of the Berliners, which would have come out even higher if money from the State budget had not been supplied.

Berlin citizens of the Berliner Wassertisch are to be thanked that this unspeakable, politically motivated, partial privatization had again been rescinded a few years later. If you now assert that the re-communization of the Berlin water works had been a complete success and a good comparative example for the purchase of the Berliner Stromnetz, then I say to you: The re-communization of the water works was merely a correction of the SPD’s fatally political, false decision and therefore in no way works as a comparative example for the socialization of the Berliner Stromnetz. The pros and cons in regards these large-scale businesses should be precisely weighed. That public interest undertakings should be in the hands of the State is thoroughly comprehensible. Since in the past sums in the millions in contested concession proceedings concerning the Berliner Stromnetz have been expended, it is in fact worthy of welcome that these legal arguments now find an end. That, to be sure, a successfully working, private business which acts in a strongly regulated market sector, can be better led by the State of Berlin – of that we have considerable doubt.

The State of Berlin as a businessman has surely not covered itself in glory. There are altogether for examples: The BER, an insufficient new housing construction, rotting bridges and streets, a gigantic backlog in public building restoration, disfunctional municipal offices, and further so. If Berliners were to rely on the promises of the politics, then they would be forsaken. How else is to be explained that, since the beginning of the legislature, no time period can be offered for the simplest, self-evident duties? Ultimately, this is a management proposition which any member of the Mittelstand, any small business owner can solve without a problem; only the Berlin State government under red-red-green since 2016 develops no solution.

Back to the electricity grid and the question of financing: As we have heard, purchasing outside of the core budget should be financed. That means that the entire purchase price is financed by a State holding and investment company [Beteilungsgesellschaft].

Credit costs are now so favorable as never and will be gladly used as an argument to sweet talk oneself into the purchase of the silverware. Yet we now also know that the electricity gird shall remain long-term in State hands. Do the credit interest rates also remain long-term so low? – Probably not. And if now long-term credit terms are concluded, we merely shift the budget risks into the future; we however do not abolish them.

Here arises the question of the current maintenance of the electricity grid. The State of Berlin is, ja, almost famous for gladly letting its State real property decay; several police and fire stations, school building, etc. – a song can be sung. The Stromnetz GmbH has in past years regularly invested three-figure sums in the millions for the restoration and construction of the grid. Whether the State of Berlin as owner also does this is the big question.

And how does the parliamentary control appear? – It is certainly promised to us and the Stromnetz GmbH will be a member of our investments committee. Yet everyone knows how difficult access to documentation will be made for us as parliamentarians when it is really critical, or how often supporting material is simply not placed at disposal or in places blacked-out. Authentic control appears differently.

The IBB, our State promotional bank, will play an important role in the financing. Yet that also means that the State of Berlin needs to ultimately assume securities which which in case of a crisis also need to be serviced. The liability risks thereby fall completely upon the taxpayer and naturally back on the core budget. Which liability risks can arise we may see in the instance of the BER which required three-figure sums in the millions so as not to need declare insolvency. Presently, we may see even so real liability risks in regards the Messe Berlin, in regards the Berliner Bäder-Betrieben, in regards all State-owned business which as a result of the lockdown preventive measures needed and need to bear considerable business losses.

In view of the State of Berlin’s highest indebtedness, we urgently plead, in direct regard of the future, to not enter into yet more budget risks which are in no way necessary. First perform actual budget duties and concern yourself so that an administration functions, before you socialize functioning, private undertakings.

Let us come to the politically subsumed goal of the coalition, which is to drive forward the energy transition. If one looks at the homepage of the Berliner Stromnetz GmbH, one can recognize that this already has now taken into its distribution network wind power investments, solar investments, and block heating power plants. One can also read that especially wind power and solar investments lead to particular challenges, since as is known, they do not constantly generate electricity. Yet the most important duty of the Stromnetz is to offer to all Berliners a secure electricity supply and to care for an equal network coverage. Precisely here we see the danger that this network coverage can no longer in the future be guaranteed. Here unfortunately help no green Utopias that can store the energy of an electricity grid. Political will plainly does not replace physical laws of nature.

In conclusion, let it be said: We hold the socialization of a private business functioning for 150 years to be false. We see in the coming decades considerable budget risks for the Berlin taxpayers and we fear that a stable electricity grid coverage can no longer be guaranteed in the future by means of political decisions.

We do not need more state, we need more entrepreneurship, more social market economy and more freedom!

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]