Markus Frohnmaier, January 29, 2026, Germany, Ukraine, Nordstream

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/56, pp. 6745-6746. 

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

Chancellor Merz speaks of an age of “Great Power Politics”. The truth is: The power Politik was never gone. That, we see in the Ukraine, in Venezuela, in Greenland. New is not the reality of the power Politik. New is a persistent, chronic weakness of Germany which encounters an increasingly multipolar world in which the interests are again openly carried out. In such a world, Germany then is only capable of acting when it combines its powers, sets priorities, and finally learns to stand up for itself. 

Before all is the CDU responsible, through decades of government failures, for almost all major political mistaken decisions which have made our country vulnerable. The completely wrong mass migration, a threat to security since 2015, the anti-economic [Wirtschaftfeindliche] withdrawal from nuclear and coal energy which drove us to dependency on gas imports and de-industrialized Germany, with dramatic consequences for welfare, public finances and sozial peace. Germany cannot afford to give away its resources to the Ukraine while we here at home are vulnerable. 

Our capitol city Berlin has just experienced how vulnerable critical infrastructure is, and can be quickly omitted by sabotage. Tens of thousands of households, following a leftist extremist attack, sat in darkness and in cold. Diesel generators were lacking, diesel generators which were in the Ukraine. 

            Claudia Roth (Greens): Oh nee! 

            Kay Gottschalk (AfD): Listen!

Germany shall pay in the next ten years for the reconstruction of the Ukraine with sums which lie beyond any serious ability to plan. 

            Claudia Roth (Greens): Ja, serious!

The CDU combines that with the formula: “So long it is necessary”. Ladies and gentlemen, that is a blank check, and blank checks are in the Politik always the beginning of the end of any control. 

Every cent of the so far around 1,000 billion euros of the Ukraine aid is debt-financed – financed with debts which in the form of principal and interest cost will afflict all future Federal budget charges. 

            Stefan Keuter (AfD): The next generations!

Debts are tomorrow’s taxes, ladies and gentlemen. We forfeit the future of our children for a country the hand of which is outstretched for our money, and to thank us apparently blows up our own German infrastructure. 

            Knut Abraham (CDU/CSU): That is shabby!

Shabby is that you of the CDU permit such a thing. Shabby is that to this day you have not sought to clarify the Nordstream explosion, Herr colleague of the CDU. 

            Thomas Rachel (CDU/CSU): Shabby is that you still haven’t said a word                                         for the civilian population in the Ukraine which is attacked daily from                                      Russia!

What do we want to actually have happen? 

First: Corruption and lack of transparency. A corruption scandal again shakes the Ukraine up to the highest circles, with effects on the energy and defense infrastructure. When a state is at war, and at the same time billions seep away, then that is not only morally unbearable but is also extremely dangerous for security policy. Since money, weapons and material do not simply disappear. They again emerge elsewhere, in dark channels, in black markets, in criminal networks. 

            Stefan Keuter (AfD): Darknets! 

            Robin Wagener (CDU/CSU): Those are the things with which you are familiar.

Second: Demands without end. It is always the same process – more weapons, more money, more guaranties, more appeals. Yet where actually is the clear accounting, what happened with the donated benefits? 

Third: We as Germans can no longer afford this. While our local governments are at limit, while families and Mittelstand note every month how expensive everything has become, while the Bundeswehr cannot even secure it own basic equipment, we shall play the role of long-term paymaster in a foreign conflict thanks to the CDU Politik. 

            Claudia Roth (Greens): Thank Putin!

Ladies and gentlemen, there needs finally be an end to that! 

            Thomas Rachel (CDU/CSU): For that, the Russian Putin is responsible.

            What do you then say to a war of aggression counter to international law?

            What do you say to Russia’s aggressive war counter to international law? 

Listen for once! You are elected as a representative of the German people, and not as a member of the Ukrainian Rada! This, the CDU’s Politik needs finally to understand. 

            Thomas Rachel (CDU/CSU): That is,  ja, embarrassing!

Fourth, and this is the point which altered everything: How do we deal with the apparent  Ukrainian attack on our infrastructure, on the sovereignty of Germany? The Federal Court of Justice in its ruling of December 10, 2025, on the Nordstream sabotage, proceeded on the basis that the attacks on the Nordstream pipelines resulted from a “highly likely […] foreign state order”. It was accepted that the act was initiated and controlled by a foreign state. The defense of the Ukrainian suspects wanted to attain immunity for these, in which – listen well, dear colleagues of the CDU – it is argued the act is a part of the war between the Ukraine and Russia. 

            Knut Abraham (CDU/CSU): Who gave the order?

Everything, really everything indicates that this attack was ordered with knowledge of the Ukrainian government. The Federal government cannot simply so continue as if this was not acknowledged. I today quite clearly demand of you: Finally examine this! 

            Knut Abraham (CDU/CSU): Yes, yes! For months!

Billions of German tax money were invested in this infrastructure project, and you did not attempt to manage a clarification. That is harmful for Germany and our citizens. 

We therefore want that now an investigative and tracking staff for the clarification of corruption, money laundering, arms trafficking, and finance of terrorism be established [Drucksache 21/3839]. We also want that complete transparency be established vis-à-vis Bundestag and public by a website following the model of the American Ukraine oversight structures. One matter needs finally be clarified: Who expends the taxpayers’ money, he has no right to non-transparency. 

            Claudia Roth (Green): The AfD says that!

That, the CDU needs finally learn and understand, ladies and gentlemen. 

We say today quite clearly: No more weapons deliveries, no additional armaments. Yes, humanitarian aid is possible. But all that effects a prolongation of the war, we no longer want. 

            Stefan Schmidt (Greens):  Putin has written that for you, or?

We want that German tax money finally remains here in Germany, and does not flow to whichever oligarchs. We want to take care that this money benefits our schools, our streets, our German infrastructure, our citizens – something which these gentlemen have long since forgotten. For that, we were elected to make Politik for German citizens – and not for the Ukraine! 

            Thomas Rachel (CSU/CSU): We make Politik for all peoples. That is the distinction. 

 

[trans: tem]

Thomas Fetsch, January 15, 2026, Rental Housing

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/53, pp. 6355-6356. 

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

“To Better Protect Renters”, so is the undertitle of the called-for motion. The here presented demands from the Linke party for a supposed rescue of an, in part, no longer functioning rental market which is unfortunately covered to a not insignificant degree with similarly knitted regulatory aims of the governing coalition – we have just now heard a bit of it – are all too well known, in a longer view massively detrimental, and stamped with a fundamental scepticism vis-à-vis owners of real property and the functionings of market forces: A sharp rental price brake, a limitation of existing rental increases, a more temporary rental freeze [Mietenstopp], a substantial restriction or indeed abolition of indexed rentals, a regulation or a ban on furnishing supplements [Möbilierungszuschlagen], a strong regulation of short-term rentals, a massive restriction of owner use terminations [Eigenbedarfskündigungen], expansion of grace period payments, an introduction of agreement and transparency obligations, etc. etc. The supposedly all-knowing state – instead of market reason and realism – shall thus set it right. Ladies and gentlemen, this false, as even so hostile to freedom, spirit with which the presented motion breathes, we reject outright. 

Instead of creating the statutory and economic conditions so that business builds new housing, and owners of housing space are not, with all force, more or less deterred from renting, socialization [Vergesellschaftung] fantasies are spread – by means of expropriation and by means of ever additional shackles laid upon the owners – and become salonfähig in bürgerliche milieux. Thereby is private rental law reconstructed into an additional sozial right, instead of finally, vigorously addressing the actual problems of the present housing market misery. 

In fact – this proceeds from a current, representative Civey survey – it is expected that the regulation of indexed rents, planned by the Federal government, as it happens threatens to become a veritable housing construction brake. Since by the long-term value guaranty of inflation protection, building projects often only become more calculable and feasible. The additional statutory guidelines – be it here in excessive form of the Linke motion, or in form of the declared views of the governing coalition – only expand and deepen this problematic still further.    

In the end, still fewer rentable dwellings are available, and the stock worsens ever further because renovation and reconstruction measures will simply be omitted due to a lack of sufficient return on rentals. That could well enough be seen, for example, in the DDR, and that, we no more want here, ladies and gentlemen. 

What have Bund, States and local governments under leadership of the old parties – including the Linke, for example, in Thüringen – done for an improvement? Nothing, with penetrating effectiveness. They much more withdraw, by plan and incisively, from the rental market and sell their stock. In climate madness, they make massively more expensive the energy and construction costs. In the bureaucracy madness active in recent decades, every construction contract means an incalculable time risk for builders of every kind. You raise, in combination with the States and local governments, striking taxes like the real estate transfer tax [Grunderwerbsteuer] and the property tax [Grundsteuer]. And thus it plainly comes to, besides the actual rent, additional, sprawling rental side-costs which have long since attained the level of a second rent. It is thus primarily your false, anti-renter and anti-landlord policy which has created the dilemma of the high rents. 

An additional, essential price-driving aspect was in any case recently named by the German Renters Union. The number of renters has risen in the past five years by around 3 million people, which has naturally, additionally and clearly intensified the dwellings supply situation. And if you all do not want to hear it: Behind that is the unplanned, uncontrolled and overwhelming migration which we self-evidently reject. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): I thought you had forgotten something!

The means of the Linke as also of the coalition – still more regulation and still deeper intervention – further does not help here, but even intensifies the situation. From this muddled situation, only a great new start helps, and which is only possible with the AfD. 

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]

Siegbert Droese, February 9, 2026, Digital Euro and Inflation

EU Parliament, Strasbourg, P10 CRE-REV(2026)02-09(1-0107/0115-0000). 

Frau President. Frau President Lagarde. Honored colleagues. 

We debate today the year’s report of the European Central Bank. This report shows primarily one thing: A central bank which is ever further removed from its actual mandate. The monetary policy of the last years has led to noticeable inflation. Millions of citizens, savers, pensioners daily lose purchasing power. Instead of clearly reappraising these failures, the ECB already plans the next profound intervention – the digital euro. 

The digital euro was sold to us all as a harmless modernization project. In truth, it is a political project which deeply intervenes into the citizens’ financial freedom. The digital euro solves no real problem, nevertheless creates numerous new risks. It is a great experiment. A digital euro creates the very concrete danger of step by step driving out cash. It makes possible the state tracking of payments, and opens the long-term possibility of taking influence in how and for what citizens may use their money. Who believes this instrument would never be politically mis-used ignores the experience of history. 

Yes, President Lagarde, you seek to pacify us today, in which you announce the third series of euro banknotes. Yet: The Alternative für Deutschland, the ESN delegation, demand a clear return of the ECB to price stability, transparency, and adherence to mandate. No digital euro without unlimited preservation of cash, no further power increase for an institution without democratic control. Stable money and freedom go together. Both today are on the daily order, both today are in play. 

[…] Herr colleague, many thanks for your speech. You speak of the ECB’s duty: Currency stability, price stability. The ECB president today here admitted in parliament there supposedly had been in the past only 10.8 percent inflation. Now the inflation is again at a normal level. The question to you: Do you believe that the ECB heads, Frau Lagarde is here present, that the ECB heads realistically estimate the social consequences of inflation? 

 

[trans: tem]

Alice Weidel, January 29, 2026, Merz Government

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/56, pp. 6651-6653. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable Herr Chancellor. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

You assert in your speech you would strengthen our ability to compete. Yet of that, our economy still has noted nothing. The bankruptcy tsunami sweeps unbraked over our country, and will in this year, on the basis of chain insolvencies, exceed a record mark of 30,000. The Mittelstand suffers the worst. The backbone of our prosperity is breaking. Our economy is threatened with collapse. 

Your self-praise in matters of tax reduction sounds like bare-faced scorn for citizens and businesses. In fact, your coalition, driven by the SPD hostile to performance, discusses a confiscatory and anti-Mittelstand intensification of the inheritance tax. You thereby want to conclusively cash-out the Mittelstand.   

And you have just hiked yet again the taxes for all by means of the rise of the CO₂ duty by a full 20 percent. You have thus already in past years with this special cost fleeced citizens and businesses of 22 billion euros. That is a pillaging of our economy. 

You spoke at Davos. You boast of the modernization of the decaying infrastructure. Of that is true only that you have agreed to a gigantic mountain of special debts which you here disguise as special funds. Half of these infrastructure special debts flow illegally into consumption spending. Your transportation minister on the other hand now again lacks the money for the construction start of urgent railway projects. 

A similar load of hot air is your bureaucracy deconstruction. So far, you’ve only built up new bureaucracy 

            Alexander Hoffmann (CSU/CSU): You actually always make the same speech.                                        Can that be?

as through the supply chain law and a massive growth of positions in the public sector. 

And as to the reform of the social system which you ever again have promised and announced to the citizens, you have there so far in any case only further raised the costs, and shamefully caved in to the demands of your 14 percent coalition partner, enacting still more tax- and debt-financed redistribution. That which you needed to do – namely, to lower the expenditures and put a stop to the abuse – you will never manage with the SPD. 

The labor minister’s Sozialstaat concept even wants to simplify the access to social benefits; savings in regards the benefits are expressly excluded. All of this will cost the taxpayer still more. 

            Sepp Müller (SPD): Rubbish! 

It shall thus simply so continue with the exploding rise of the Kindergeld transfer payments to foreign countries. Over 5 billion euros since 2010, a half billion euros in last year alone. The social duties reach a record value. 

You plunder the working people, rob their willingness to work, the future, and the trust in the Sozialstaat, and still say to them they should work longer. That is an infamy. 

Yet that unfortunately also shows that you have certainly not understood the actual problems in this country. It lies not in the working time, but in the politically fashioned, much too high costs due to the green energy transition which you continue to manage, in the much too high taxes and duties for business, and in the excessive bureaucracy. 

            Götz Frömming (AfD): Exactly!

You yourself designate the nuclear power withdrawal as a mistake, yet all the same blow up nuclear power plants, as in CSU-governed Bavaria last October. Thus appears double morality. You lie to your voters. That shows that you bend before the Diktat of the SPD and Greens. There is a majority for the re-entry into the nuclear power – in the society and, if you want it, also in this house, in this parliament. Yet you do not want it. 

You explain windpower as a transition technology; yet at the same time, you want to complete Habeck’s green madness plan, to continue to sink billions in subventions for wind parks in the North Sea without a return, and, after the home forests, to seriously damage this susceptible eco-system. 

            Götz Frömming (AfD): Schweinerei!

As a last rescue anchor, you cling to new gas power plants. With what do you want to operate them? And how do you explain to the people that at the same time the German gas network should be destroyed and they should tear out their gas heating? You want to wreck and destroy an infrastructure which was erected by an immense expenditure of earlier generations. That can be explained by no one with a healthy, human understanding. 

Your government supports the fateful EU decision to forbid imports of advantageous natural gas from Russia and for the future. The new, one-sided dependency on expensive American liquified gas proves to be extremely inefficient and dangerous. 

            Frauke Heiligenstadt (SPD): Here is what is quite differently dangerous!

And without additional gas power, the storage certainly runs empty. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): Your intellectual storage runs quite empty!

A gas shortage with grave, compulsory shut-offs threatens. 

All of these grotesque contradictions, false assertions and fantasies are responsible for that Germany and this Federal government are no longer taken seriously in the world. And that is fatal, certainly in this geo-political situation. 

The U.S.A. is an important ally; yet they represent their own interests. And we need to finally define and self-consciously represent our own national, German interests, certainly when they diverge from those of our allies and partners. To send a dozen soldiers to Greenland, and next day order them back is – with permission – a hullabaloo, and no serious, solution-oriented foreign policy guided by interests. 

            Franziska Kersten (SPD): What?

It is a mistake that you reject the peace council initiated by Donald Trump. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): Rip off a couple of billion dollars, ne? 

            Katrin Göring-Eckardt (Greens): You yourself need laugh!

The board is an opportunity to unravel the multiple blockades of an ineffective UN. 

            Katharina Dröge (Greens): That is ridiculous!

It lies on the other hand in the German interest to quickly end the Ukraine war. Germany needs to cooperate in the peace process and realize its own interests. To that belongs averting an EU and NATO membership of the Ukraine, and further transfer payments from Germany. Much more, we require compensation for the state terrorist attacks on the Nord Stream gas pipeline infrastructure, vital for Germany, for which Kiev is obviously co-responsible. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): Do so further peacefully!

The EU, the cohesion of which you stereotypically swear by, also here is part of the problem, and not of the solution. 

For Germany to win back its economic strength and its political weight, we need to set aside the mistaken developments which weaken us. 

            Irene Mihalic (Greens): Kremlin or MAGA? 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): It’s difficult to have to decide between                                                           Kremlin or MAGA!

We need to end the mass migration and, as far as it goes, reverse it. This way requires a restrictive immigration policy, with invariable border controls, rejections, and rigorous deportations, 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): Perhaps you should remain in Switzerland.

as well as a shut-off of the social and financial migration magnets, and we in addition require an immigration and naturalization moratorium. 

            Frauke Heiligenstadt (SPD): And you also want to have ICE, ne?

We need to rescind the ruinous energy transition and climb up out of the climate protection policy. 

            Katrin Fey (Linke): My goodness!

It is a German and EU solo approach [Alleingang] which destroys our economy. 

Only when we depart from this wrong way can we deconstruct the financial excess cost, and overcome the paralyzing bureaucratic manipulation and over-regulation. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): That is the result of your irradiation [Verstrahlung]!

The way to the resurgence leads through the re-entry into the nuclear power, the abolition of the CO₂ duties, and the immediate elimination of the combustion engine ban and heating law. An AfD government will get these reforms underway, for which this government is not ready and in position. 

I am grateful. 

            Jens Spahn (CSU/CSU): That was all? That was just nothing!

 

[trans: tem]

Tobias Peterka, December 18, 2025, NGO Finance

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/50, pp. 5860-5862. 

Frau President. Dear citizens. 

A ghost haunts Germany – ominous, it is in every mouth, yet is difficult to hold. It is the much cited civil society. Ascribed to this strange tautology are indeed magical powers: It can in an instant save our democracy, and conveniently has the ever exactly correct, thus leftist opinion and agenda. – Let there be an end to this ghost story from the ARD and ZDF! Every awake ten year old meanwhile knows that there is with us a public, state-promoted, opinion guideline 

            Hendrik Hoppenstedt (CDU/CSU): What nonsense!

and is beside the reality which every citizen sees if he does not, like you for example, go through life with eyes closed. For precisely that reason is required this motion [Drucksache 21/3301] for the installation of a formal investigating committee. For precisely that reason, we need to illuminate and without compromise clean out the state and party entanglements with so-called NGOs. The term “non-governmental organization” degenerates in a Germany with open eyes into a joke. There are according to strict socialist logic of course many governmental front organizations, 

            Helge Limburg (Greens): Yes, you know about that!

financially and careerist wired with Greens, SPD and those still more unappetizing. The approach is not complicated: It is simply the old left approach, “Public funds are enough there”, perverted and driven to the extreme. In any case, typically leftist are the lying leaders with Democracy on the banner, wanting to stifle precisely that. 

            Helge Limburg (Greens): Yes, you know about “stifle democracy”!                                                            That is your theme!

You attack the party strongest in the polls nationwide with financed snipers because meanwhile you quite precisely know that, by fair means, no more cabbage is to be grown against us. 

            Helge Limburg (Greens): Financed snipers from Moscow, you take care of yourself!

You thereby undermine the most basic rules of democracy; and that, we can no longer accept. Here you can cry as you want; you thereby only confirm it. 

The famous Federal program “Democracy live!”, for example, received in the last years over 600 million euros. 

            Clara Bünger (Linke): “Democracy Live!” is a problem for you! You want                            “Democracy die!”

It will be so passed on according to practice to thousands of project functions of which the government, according to its own statement, has not the least data. There is often simply some price tag; since Antifa phrases and pedigrees were besides always more important in regards the top jobs. Listen! – “Frau Klingbeil” co-directs the Initiative D21, and “Herr Göring-Eckardt” United4Rescue. Naturally all selflessly for the cause, it is understood. 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): You member Wenzel Schmidt made 450 euros. Do you say                                         something on that? You want to exclude him, I hear.

By countless NGOs melded to ministries and incited against the opposition are citizens vilified, doing the very thing you accuse us of, namely dividing to your heart’s content – and before all before the Bundestag election. 

            Helge Limburg (Greens): How is it actually with your intra-delegation democracy?             May Herr Lucassen at all still come? Or has he received from you a ban from the                hall?

To the dear Union which here is silently suspect. You at the time had correctly recognized this. 500 questions were fired broadside at Scholz and Habeck. 

            Clara Bünger (Linke): 551!

Yet what then happened? Scarcely had the powder smoke blown away, and one sailed with the SPD into the coalition harbor and once again fraternally divvied up the tax money. Bravo! That, I name betrayal of truthfulness and a willingness to explain – actually, ur-conservative values.           

            Helge Limburg (Greens): Your speech is an insult to every true conservative!

The voters meanwhile precisely know: It is still found at the CDU/CSU at most with a microscope. At least vote for our motion now! Unless of course you want the hanky-panky to continue, which in the end – this, you precisely know – will be directed against you. Still, it is perhaps not too late. 

Because the same was again intended, we wanted to prevent droll democracy workshops and youth formation – which for the AfD ultimately have something against an authentic, free democracy. 

            Clara Bünger (Linke): Yet you too want public funds!

We ever again vehemently demand a Bürger society without GEZ broadcasting, leftist spying, or fear in the workplaces; further, direct democracy and the direct election of high state officials. Your mudslinging at this impeccable stance meanwhile falls back on you. The citizens are not so blind and immature as you would gladly have them. I am thus really excited – from you, the Linke, I know it – by what next from the Union here will be led into the field. 

What is, for example, with an authentic condition of democracy, the recognition of the Basic Law by means of diverse Antifa projects? Does that perhaps come sometime, or would that still be too much spotlight on networks shy of the light, which reach deep into hardened anti-semitism?           

            Helge Limburg (Greens): “Light-shy networks”, “anti-semitism”. All precisely                                        your themes! 

            Katrin Fey (Linke): Anti-semitism comes from the right!

Or perhaps again comes punctually at the State legislative elections anti-right advertising via the Federal websites, as 14 days before the Bundestag election at the Federal Family Ministry? 

            Helge Limburg (Greens): How many of your communications politicians are actually             active in terrorist associations? Tell us that for once! How many of your members                were investigated on account of accepting foreign money? How many of the AfD’s                Bundestag offices have actually been already searched?

May perhaps the BUND, promoted with millions, be called upon, besides climate propaganda, to protest against everything right of center? 

For you, is it okay that HateAid and the Amadeu Antonio Foundation agitate against everything conservative, 

            Katrin Fey (Linke): That’s not right! You’re not conservative!

and still laugh yourselves sick that BlackRock Man Merz, with bended knee, empowers you with the purse? Apparently, the answer is “ja”. 

Since: Where is the moratorium, the draining of the swamp by means of a guidelines competence? It will not come, since then the therein ailing SPD would immediately be at the battlements. When already the wicked right citizens push old auntie in the direction of single digits, 

            Clara Bünger (Linke): That is beloved democracy! And you want to exterminate it!

then the preparation still needs be a bit further cultivated out of sozi-green student teachers and violent Antifas. Clearly, that might run under an orderly retreat. And, here and there, you could still do it, 

            Maja Wallstein (SPD): We are not like you, Herr Peterka! We are not like you!

as it was at peak woke, thus total air supremacy of the leftist dementia, like before Corona. Yet you know quite precisely: This time is past, and will with luck never come again. 

Thus: Let us wind up this swamp! Since in one thing even your troops are right: From history, one must learn. 

            President Julia Klöckner: Your speaking time is exceeded, and therefore your                                           speech is to end.

Let’s tackle it so that a self-service in our country can never again occurs. 

Many thanks.

 

 

[trans: tem]

Leif-Erik Holm, November 13, 2025, De-industrialization and Energy

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/40, pp. 4554-4555. 

Frau President. Right honorable citizens. Ladies and gentlemen. 

Yesterday, the new economic opinion of the experts council came out. The council expects a growth of 0.9 percent in the coming year; once again a shrunken prognosis; initially, it was 1.3 percent. If we then adjust the whole for the holidays – in the next year, many holidays unfortunately fall on the weekends – then we are at only 0.6 percent. Thus sick man Germany slogs further on. Yet you here now want with this present hour to celebrate yourselves for your economic success. This success simply does not exist. 

I was this morning with the expert, Frau Professor Grimm. She put the naked numbers on the wall: The industrial production breaks down, and indeed on a broad front. In all sectors, it recedes. There is no reason to celebrate anything. Germany unfortunately is abolishing itself as an industrial country if it so continues. And you present no solutions. You only daub a bit of plaster, and administer the downfall – nothing more. 

            Nicklas Kappe (CDU/CSU): Which solutions do you have?

You want to speak in this present hour on your reliefs: On the lowering of the grid fees and the introduction of an industrial electricity price. Yes, in the near term we need to do something to get away from the dramatically high electricity prices. Only, why then don’t you do what benefits all businesses and budgets? Where remains the reduction of the electricity tax for all? That would be a correct step. 

This, what you are doing – I already said it last week – is “left pocket, right pocket”. I want to tell it again: The surcharge for the grid fees, 6.5 million euros, the taxpayer now pays; the costs of the industrial electricity prices, 1.5 billion euros, the taxpayer now pays; the costs for the EEG assessment, 16 billion euros, the taxpayer already pays; the electricity price compensation, 3 billion euros, will be paid by the taxpayer; and the gas storage assessment, 3 billion euros, the taxpayer pays. That is 30 billion euros. You hide the costs of the dead energy transition in the budget. It’s simply not noted that the entire climate racket doesn’t work. 

Without these billions in subventions, nothing more would be left of this seemingly pretty fairy tale castle. The budget meanwhile also correspondingly appears. Only by your special indebtedness can you still camouflage something. The problem remains: Energy is scarce and is much too expensive. Only an expansion of the supply and a reduction of the state impact on the energy costs – for all, note well – can change something therein. We require secure power plant performance. We allow no demolition of cooling towers. Much more, we need to re-activate nuclear power plants and build anew.   

            Tarek Al-Wazir (Greens): And which cost nothing, or what?

As long as you don’t pick up and as long as you don’t prepare a lower energy price in the market, and in fact without subventions, so is there here, God knows, nothing to celebrate. 

Frau Minister – she is unfortunately gone –

            Catharina dos Santos-Wintz (CDU/CSU): She is at the Budget Committee.                                               You know that!

it is nice that the bust of Ludwig Erhard is again in the Ministry. That is good. Yet I also want to say, Frau Reiche: If you really want to be the government’s ordnungspolitische wise man, then more than an overcoming of symptoms, more than short-term plaster, is required. Your draft budget laws, which now come in series to the plenary session, are basically, as before, Habeck laws. Here and there, a bit was slimmed down, yet where are the promised changes in policy? They occur only after the comma. Your subventions orgy which now continues through the budget will soon no longer function. The cost of debts rises dramatically, and of that also the economic wise man Veronika Grimm has written to you in a register – cite: 

            “From 2029, we expend the entire intake of the state for Soziales, defense and                                           interest payments.”

End citation. And – another cite: 

            “This finance planning is a declaration of bankruptcy.”

Frau Grimm is right. Herr Finance Minister, since you speak similarly – he is now here – say readily something on that. This finance planning is a declaration of bankruptcy. Truly! 

2029 is for us also as the AfD an important year’s number. Then we will here in this sovereign house be the governing delegation. 

            Sandra Stein (Green): Do we perhaps still have elections, or what?

We will form the government. We will then need to regulate that. That will become a show of strength. Yet I promise: We will take care that this expensive wrong way ends. It does not work. 

One thing still to promise: First we start in the States. It begins in 2026 in Sachsen-Anhalt and in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. I therein rejoice. 

Thank you. 

 

[trans: tem]

Alice Weidel, November 26, 2025, Deutschland Plan

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/43, pp. 4947-4951. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable Herr Chancellor. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

This end-stage coalition ever more recalls the bridge of the Titanic: Germany lists, the bulkheads break open. Yet you have the ship’s band play on with the same soothing melodies. 

            Katharina Dröge (Greens): The country is thus bad-mouthed!

The Captain has nothing more to say and simply looks on because the First Mate has snatched from him the Captain’s cap. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): And the ordinary seaman stands at the speaker’s podium.

Germany can no longer continue to afford this clowns theater which you here allow for half a year. The crisis is here and it is not only one iceberg, it is at least five which rip open the hull of our ship of state. 

Crisis site number one: The social state. The social security system is out of control and becomes unaffordable. A third of the Bund’s total tax income in the coming year alone will need to be expended for stabilizing the pension account. In that regard, the demographic costs resulting from the retirement of the high birthrate cohorts have been acknowledged for decades. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): Explain for once to the citizens how you want to                                          finance your pensions package! 70 percent!

42.3 percent of non-wage costs. That is a record and warning sign. Instead, when it is much too late to reform the system and form reserves for the future, you still pulverize the at hand financial scope of action so as to gain time. 

The social state crisis is inseparable from the migration crisis. Millions of people have in the last ten years streamed uncontrolled into the country. They have in large part immigrated directly into the social system. The consequent costs one-sidedly burden the working population – the tax-payers and those who pay contributions. They shall stabilize, with renunciation of benefits and higher contributions, the unaffordable healthcare system and they need bear the costs of the Bürgergeld, long since become migrant money which continues out of control. Every second recipient is a foreign citizen and is provided for without cost and contribution. What of that is sozial justice? 

Your SPD coalition partner braces itself against even symbolic policy corrections. To merely remove the Ukrainians sustained by the benefits terms in the last half-year is not even a drop on the hot stone. In Germany, there are one million rejected asylum applicants; yet of your grandiosely announced deportation offensive nothing continues to be seen. Despite receding asylum numbers, each year a large city immigrates by abuse of the asylum law, and an additional large city comes after by way of the family reunification. 

The citizens who need pay for this moreover lose their Heimat. In 275 Bavarian school classes sits not a single native German-speaking child. That is a declaration of bankruptcy. 

The migration crisis kills the right of entire generations to an orderly education. And while the borders remain open, our Christmas markets are transformed into fortresses or will even be entirely cancelled. 

Needing to bear these burdens is a country which for over three years is stuck deep in a recession. The industrial core erodes at a breath-taking speed. The German automobile industry has lost 50,000 jobs within one year. Down-sizing and exodus take hold of the entire production industry. 41 percent of the operations plan in 2026 a further down-sizing. A never before seen wave of bankruptcy sweeps across the country and decimates the Mittelstand. Credit insurers fear the number of insolvencies could climb in the coming year to 30,000. 

What drives the businesses and workplaces out of the country is primarily the homemade energy crisis; the industrial chiefs, who unfortunately were silent for much too long, now say this to you.

The artificially increased expense of energy by means of the so-called CO₂ pricing will still further accelerate the de-industrialization. You raise an arbitrarily imposed tax on the air, artificially drive it further to the heights, and still call that a market economy instrument, Herr Merz. The green nonsense can scarcely be further driven to the extreme. 

The dogmas of open borders and climate protection drive our country, our beloved Germany, to ruin. Instead of coming about, your coalition steps on the gas along this wrong way, and wants with a “new boost” for the international climate protection bless the entire world with the downfall. 

And because you do not want to acknowledge all of that, but toss around money which does not belong to you as if there was no tomorrow, Germany is also stuck in a binding finance and state indebtedness crisis. 

With the financial coup d’état, euphemistically called “special funds” [Sondervermögen], you have burdened Germany with the largest mountain of debt in post-war history. Of that will remain only the interest and tax costs for the tax and contribution payers. Every second euro of the special funds supposedly foreseen for investment will, according to your planning, be mis-appropriated for consumption expenditures. That quite clearly does not conform to the constitution. Your budget does not conform to the constitution. 

            Sven Lehmann (Green): Your party does not conform to the constitution!

Instead of, as promised, eliminating superfluous spending and consolidating the budget, you toss the money by the handful out the window. A billion for a dubious tropical forest, six billion  moreover for an international climate protection, 11.5 billion for the Ukraine without knowing whether or not the money yet again lands at corrupt war profiteers. Gott sei Dank – Gott sei Dank! – we have with Donald Trump a real chance of peace, to which you have contributed no part. Quite the contrary. 

The fivefold crisis is not a fatal destiny but a direct consequence of false political decisions. It cannot so continue; you also quite precisely know that, and I do not want to again do the math for you, for you of the SPD just so not. 

            Jürgen Cosse (SPD): You do the math!

You are stuck so deep in the morass of the socialist superstition of redistribution that you cannot grasp what you, with your ideological wrong way, have generally done to our country. 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): What do you say of your members’ Russia travel?

Primitive Antifa screaming 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): Which was good! 

            Alexander Hoffmann (CSU/CSU): Why? The Antifa is pleased to be in Russia!

and mindless, anti-democratic Verbot fantasies for you replace the competition of political ideas. The stereotypical cry for more and still higher taxes and for more and higher debt for you take the place of economic expertise. 

            President Julia Klöckner: Frau member, do you permit an interim question from                                        member Wiese of the SPD delegation?

No, that is unusual in the budget debate; you know that. 

            Katharina Dröge (Greens): That is not at all unusual. You simply do not dare! 

            Alexander Hoffmann (CSU/CSU): You are scared, Frau Weidel! You are scared!                                         Nothing other! You are scared of the interim question!

No, I am not scared, anyway of you. You are scared. Might I please continue? 

            Alexander Hoffmann (CSU/CSU): The answer is not in the speaking                                                         notes, ne?

             President Julia Klöckner: Excuse me. She or the member herself decides                                                whether he or she permits an interim question. 

            Sven Lehmann (Green): Yes, but not with the reasoning. 

            Götz Frömming (AfD): It is nevertheless possible for all to speak. What is this?

            President Julia Klöckner: We need not now comment on that here.                                        Please continue.

How you here smirk! That, the voters will exactly note before all things at the impending State legislative elections! 

            Frauke Heiligenstadt (SPD): You don’t smirk, ne? 

            Sören Pellmann (Green): That’s certainly a level in the early morning!

You, dear colleagues of the Union, know quite precisely what you do. Some of you even speak ever again of what actually needs to be done. Yet you do exactly the opposite. 

And you, Herr Merz, have in the election campaign announced and promised all possible things, what is of bitter necessity and needs be urgently done. You thereby grandiosely helped yourself to our election program. 

            Jens Spahn (CDU/CS): Oh mann, oh mann, oh mann!

Yet then – since otherwise Herr Merz would not be Herr Merz – you broke every single one of your election promises. You left the citizens in the lurch and wore yourself out with slander and insult of the opposition, instead of addressing the problems in our country. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): Get a handkerchief!

You have thereby wasted valuable time and intensified the crisis, and all of that because you make yourself a prisoner of the leftist unity front as a result of your firewall. 

            Günter Krings (CDU/CSU): Do you come to the content?

 You let yourself be led about one time after another by the SPD. The SPD’s favor, upon which your chancellorship depends, is more important to you than the good of our country and of your own party. 

This tactic has failed. Germany requires an immediate program for reform of the state, economy and society. It is time for the Deutschland Plan of the Alternative für Deutschland. 

It is a twelve point plan to again get Germany on its feet. 

First, we require advantageous and secure energy. That is the basis for economic impetus and prosperity. We therefore need to immediately end the failed experiment of the energy transformation. We need to immediately end the destruction of nuclear power, the demolition of nuclear power plants, and push the re-entry into nuclear power and we need to buy natural gas and oil where it is most advantageous, and that is in Russia. 

            Reinhard Brandl (CDU/CSU): Now it comes out! 

            Alexander Hoffmann (CSU/CSU): Ah!

And that is in our national interest, and the Americans want that, too. And that is why there are these peace negotiations: Because the Americans represent their national interests, which you for Germany have forgotten, dear CDU. 

            Steffen Bilger (CDU/CSU): Here, it’s about Russian interests! 

            Reinhard Brandl (CDU/CSU): Which interests do you represent?                                            The mask has fallen!

Second. We need to end the wind and solar electricity subventions and, without replacement, eliminate the ruinous CO₂ pricing and the emissions trade. And we need to immediately abolish  the unhappy heating law which cold expropriates countless owners of real property. 

Third. In economic policy, the fundamentals need again apply: Market economy Ordnungspolitik instead of eco-socialist planned economy. 

            Claudia Roth (Greens): Oah!

That means the abolition of the combustion engine Verbot and all supply chain laws at the national as well as the EU level. We will end the Politik of Verbot and manipulation. 

            Katharina Dröge (Greens): Because human rights for you simply play not role at all!

Fourth. Our economy requires an unleashing program for setting free market economic powers which liberate them from bureaucratic regulations and drastically lowers the cost of taxes and duties. 

Fifth. In Sozialpolitik, we need to return consistently to the solidarity principle. Full social benefits only for members of the solidarity community who also make their contributions to the social security systems. I certainly do not know what you have against the solidarity principle. That, I find interesting. 

            Jürgen Cosse (SPD): Do you actually pay taxes in Germany? 

            Sven Lehmann (Greens): Against you we have something.

In place of the unfortunately baptised by you Bürgergeld, an activating basic security needs to enter which in fact drastically sinks the costs. 

Sixth. So that the statutory Pension Insurance remains affordable, it needs to be completely relieved of all non-insurance benefits and be supported by means of additional funded pillars. 

            Ines Schwerdtner (Linke): Neo-liberal!

To that also belongs a pension state fund, a so-called equalization [Ausgleich] fund for a stabilization of the statutory pension of the first pillar. The officials pension needs to be reformed, the civil service status strictly limited to a few sovereign areas of responsibility. Politicians, officials and holders of mandates need to be included in the statutory Pensions Insurance. 

Seventh. The absent migration change needs to be introduced by a Politik of the closed door. That means in clear text: Seamless border controls, turning back all illegals without exception, finally a rigorous deportation which the law besides prescribes, and an end to the multi-million violations of the law. 

Eighth. The migration magnets will be turned off. For asylum applicants, there is only benefits in kind instead of cash. Naturalized will be only those who, according to strong criteria and at earliest after ten years, are standing on their feet and fully at work. Naturalization by claim will be abolished. 

Ninth. State spending needs to be decisively slashed. Instead of unlimited new indebtedness, the public hand needs to get by with the tax intake. The state needs to keep itself out of the economy and out of the private life of the citizens, and confine itself to its core duties: Domestic and external security, maintenance of the state of law and public order. 

Tenth. Clientele policy subventions will be eliminated. The public financing of pseudo non-political organizations will be forbidden. The Antifa as a terrorist organization will be forbidden. The public broadcasting fees will be abolished. The squandering of tax money in all the world  ends. We require our remaining resources for our own country, for our own citizens. 

Eleventh. Urgently necessary is a structural reform which deconstructs the bureaucracy, clears away the funding jungle and leaves tax money in economic circulation with the citizens and business. 

Twelfth and last. A Tax Reform 25 with uniformly lowered tax rates, family splitting and a high allowance relieves the large majority of citizens, families, and before all the middle class. The solidarity surcharge will finally be completely abolished. 

That is our Deutschland Plan, that is our immediate program for Germany. 

            Götz Frömming (AfD): Bravo!

The most important and urgent measures to correct the damages we could in common immediately decide. Immediately! The majorities for that would be at hand in this house if the bürgerlichen powers of reason come together 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): You are not bürgerliche! 

            Derya Turk-Nachbaur (SPD): Extreme right is other than bürgerliche!

and finally fulfill the will of the voters, the majority of whom voted for a bürgerliche center-right Politik. 

            Michael Schrodi (SPD): Extreme right! 

            Claudia Roth (Greens): You are not bürgerliche!

It is thus about namely a center-right Politik, 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): Extreme right!

a bürgerliche Politik and no progressive leftist-green Politik. You here have walled yourselves in. Make reasonable Politik for the citizens and business. 

It thus lies with you, right honorable colleagues of the Union, whether you want to continue to allow yourselves to be led by leftist apron strings and green losers, or 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): …whether you continue to surround yourself                                                 with right-wing extremists!

whether you are ready to place the good of the country above personal vanities and ideological prejudices. We are ready for that, out of love and responsibility for Germany. 

I am grateful. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): So simple-minded!

  

[trans: tem]

Ulrike Schielke-Ziesing, November 14, 2025, Pensions

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/41, pp. 4777-4780. 

Right honorable Frau President. Dear colleagues. Esteemed citizens. 

This motion here was already twice on the daily order; you have twice set it aside, the last time four weeks ago. That’s not so bad; since there is already another motion: “Reform of the Politicians’ Pensions – Admit Bundestag Members into the Statutory Pension Insurance”. Exactly which is from us and which we have also debated. I need say: I have seldom experienced such a dishonest debate, full of false assertions – an unbelievable lack of respect for the voters. 

“Nothing in the world is so powerful as an idea whose time has come”, it is said. Yet here the Herr Hugo did not know the German old parties. One of these ideas is the reform of the politicians’ pension, as it was prepared already in 2013 by the independent commission on questions of members’ rights. Which was set up in 2011 by the elders council, and then indeed due to the sustained criticism of the existing system. Norbert Lammert was then Bundestag President and he said the principal problem is – cite – simply not avoiding, by means of the statutory construction, the suspicion of self-serving. For all that, he spoke only of a suspicion. 

The results of the commission we all since 2013 have passed on like a hot potato from government to government, and I say: Many of today’s colleagues apparently wanted that all of this remains so, as it is, otherwise you would not have so done down our motion. In that regard, the inclusion of the Bundestag members in the statutory Pension Insurance is nevertheless something you all supposedly want – as far as Herr Heveling. For colleague Grau, that was even a question of rectitude. Colleague Dieren was also quite firm, as besides his entire delegation. Only: Why did he then for an entire six minutes talk past the theme of statutory Pension Insurance? What should that be? And in the Union too is the thought, ja, not entirely unknown. 

Yet, as we of the AfD reminded you of that with our motion, it was again set aside because we supposedly were in the wrong, as Herr Grau meant. Note: When we as AfD want the members to pay into the statutory account, then naturally it’s not out of fine motives like your party, but so to divide or make the parliament ridiculous, to sow mistrust, or – fully besides the point – to keep people in a psychological dependency. To such a need it again comes! That came from Herr Nacke who for half his speaking time insulted us with citations from a book from 1978. I call that conspiracy blather [Verschwörungsgeschwurbel]! 

Dear colleagues, it can be done so; I understand that. But I betray to you a secret: It’s all the same to the citizens out there. The citizens out there have a nose full of your partisan purity  orders [parteitaktischen Reinheitsgeboten], they also no longer want to hear of all that does not go. The citizens want you to get on the ball and show that you don’t take yourself as more important than the interests of the citizens. 

It is thus quite simple: Either you are for the inclusion of the Bundestag members, thus with us, in the statutory Pension Insurance – then go and work up a concept with your government majority; nothing other do we require with our motion – or else you do not want it; then leave it and let the voters decide what they think of it – nothing more and nothing less. But please stop further cackling [weiter zu verkackeiern] at the citizens. 

I thereby come again to the motion which is presented here today to us and which unfortunately – and I say this with real regret – once again turns out to be the usual socialist cheese. Here is found for example the demand for doubling the income threshold, and indeed for all. That would presently be around 17,000 euros. 

            Sören Pellmann (Linke): It would be a first step!

And as always, higher pensions would be cut. With other words: When all alike are poor, you are happy. In the end is the single pension. 

            Sören Pellmann (Linke): Read and understand such a matter!

To that extent, it is insolent of the Linke colleagues to accuse us, as it happens, of wanting to enrich ourselves because we – note well, only for members – want to moderately raise the income threshold, and rather tall talk from this kind of a party of the greedy for which it’s basically always about the money, namely other people’s money.   

Dear colleagues, a pension system is not reconstructed with redistribution. Where that leads, we also presently see in the pension package. Only here the money comes not from the rich, but from the young who at sometime need to pay for the entirety, and indeed without any guaranty that, from that, something remains for them. It cannot so continue. 

Dear colleagues, it is five before twelve. The business associations, the employees, the experts council, and not last the young, at least those of the CDU, know this. And the citizens know it, too; they no longer believe a word from you. 

What use is it then to write into the law horrendous sums of tax subsidies beginning in 2029 for   the pension when these billions are not there? And I say: They are not needed, since the solution lies at hand; it’s called pension reform. This however would mean not to again shove off the responsibility to a commission and until the cows come home, as you now for decades have practiced, but finally to begin with the measures which are needed. Then you could renounce namely dubious tricks like the setting aside of the catch-up factor. 

There are so many possibilities: A more rapid increase in the capital-covered expansion – for that, we have already put forward in the last legislative period a substantially better alternative for an early start pension with our motion for a Junior Savings Deposit – , the relief of the Pension Insurance from the ballast of non-insurance benefits, the inclusion of additional groups in the statutory Pension Insurance. And we require measures to prevent old age poverty. It is nonsense that, for example, the new mothers pension should be counted in the basic security. As the AfD, we for years demand a 25 percent allowance for the elderly in the basic security. 

And I thereby come to an additional false assertion which is here gladly called in against us, that namely the AfD had no proposals of its own, as it better goes. And that’s not right. We even have a better alternative to the so-called active pension, a motion in which the self-employed plainly do not again remain outside, and in which employees are plainly not as ever disadvantaged. This motion is also put forward. Additional motions for private and occupational [betrieblichen] provision will follow. 

Dear colleagues, you see there are many opportunities in the pension area, only – and thus the circle closes – the motion put forward does not belong to that. 

Many thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Rüdiger Lucassen, September 17, 2025, Defense Procurement

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/24, pp. 2531-2532. 

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

There is nothing more useless than the so-called politicians’ ranking. Defense Minister Boris Pistorius is in first place. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): Jealous?

Yet who profits from the first place? No one. Who profits from this first place? The SPD not once, see Nordrhein-Westfalen.  Boris Pistorius, also not; since he cannot transmute his favorability into political success. That hinders his party friends; see conscription. Pistorius wants it, his party wants it not. And who still believes that the SPD will send Herr Pistorius into the running as the next Chancellor candidate plainly does not know the SPD. Nothing in this party is so unloved as success. The SPD since Gerhard Schröder always decides for mediocrity. See Heiko Maas, see Norbert Walter-Borjans, see Saskia Esken, see Bärbel Bas, see, see, see. 

Who unfortunately also has nothing of the favorability of the Defense Minister are the Bundeswehr and Germany’s security, since, except for announcements and an explanation that runs at length, Boris Pistorius has delivered nothing. 

Ladies and gentlemen, the Federal government’s 2025 defense budget suffers from a lack of concept. The government with the debts empowerment bowls over the future generations and orders everything that the industry offers. Since 2022, the Bundestag has voted for and agreed to 324 procurement proposals, an unbelievable number, without a conceptual basis. No one can say which procurement will be urgently required, and which not. 

Yet what the Defense Ministry has not accomplished is the operationalization of the armament of the Bundeswehr. That would be an urgent prerequisite for the mission-readiness of the armed forces. What shall Germany’s armed forces be able to do operationally? Where shall it be able? How long shall it be able? It plainly does not suffice to throw around keywords like “East Flank Lithuania” or “Hub Germany”. An authentic operational plan needs to go into details and it must set priorities. All of that is not put forward. Thus the coalition also does not prioritize the procurement. You procure what is there, and not what will be needed. 

I want to address a second defect which I hold to be utterly unacceptable, namely the lack of transparency in the armaments procurement. The German Bundestag needs to know to whom are ultimately allotted the weapons which it has agreed to procure. The AfD has basically voted for the armament of the Bundeswehr. We stand for national defense and external security. When however the Federal government takes upon itself the right, immediately upon delivery, to redirect to the Ukraine weapons which we as parliament have procured for the Bundeswehr, that is contempt for the will of parliament, and it is unconstitutional. 

Next point. We also reject the financing of German weapons for the Ukraine by Budget item 60 – primarily because it is German tax money, no political plan is acknowledged beyond the carry-on talk, and the Federal government does not trouble itself for a diplomatic solution of the Russian-Ukrainian war. Yet we also reject these proceedings because it leads to displacement effects in regards our own armaments procurement. You propose to quickly make the Bundeswehr ready for defense, yet with your tax-financed Ukraine procurements, ensure that armaments orders for the German troops will be shoved behind. You thereby sabotage the German defense readiness. 

The Federal government invented the term “Zeitenwende” [change of times], yet cannot do it. The AfD can do it, and we will do it. 

Thank you. 

 

[trans: tem]