Ulrike Schielke-Ziesing, September 27, 2024, Pensions and Children

German Bundestag, September 27, 2024, Plenarprotokoll 20/189, pp. 24585-24586. 

Frau President. Dear colleagues. Honorable citizens. 

In the Middle Ages, it was common to attempt to heal the sick by draining them of blood by the liter – the sicker, the more and the more often. That, for most, did not turn out well. At some time, one became smarter and abandoned that. Gott sei Dank! 

Yet the Federal government still today thinks of stabilizing the statutory pension by operating on one artery after another. I do not now speak by way of exception of non-insurance benefits, but of the irregular and multiple cutting of the Federal added subsidy within three years until 2027 of a total 10 billion euros. These lopped-off billions will not be invested in, for example, a Generations Capital, but they are simply gone, disappeared into the depths of the Federal government’s budget holes – money which is lacking for the Pension Insurance. 

And thus these cuts lead to that the Pension Insurance’s reserves empty much earlier, and for that the contribution increases earlier and further than planned. The German Pension Insurance Union figures into the reckoning contribution rates of 22.4 percent up to 2040. It is not mentioned that it remains there. The basic reason for that is the limit line for the pension level, which was called up by the SPD only so long as to maintain the shaky construction until the Ampel is history, and a new government of shambles may sweep up. 

In this situation, the government tinkers with a so-called Generations Capital at the pump – beyond the debt brake and with the corresponding subsequent costs. The Federal Audit Authority has calculated that the yield from this Generations Capital can bring by 2039 a relief of the contribution of, believe it or not, 0.4 percentage points, if at all. The German Pension Insurance is rightly concerned that this more likely may not come; which is to say, contribution payments to the account for that will also be ordered. With an authentically funded support for old age insurance, as in, for example, Finland, Canada, Japan or Sweden, this Generations Capital has nothing to do. 

Ja, but why then is it done? Because Herr Scholz has so decided and Herr Lindner so far does not contradict, 

            Hermann Gröhe (CDU/CSU): Where is he, actually?

even when this does not suit colleague Vogel. And precisely that, I do not understand. His colleague Mordhorst said quite openly – cite: “The SPD lies in the face of pensioners and workers.” The Federal Budget Authority expresses it somewhat more finely and figures the added expenditures for the pension package until 2045 at, believe it or not, 507 billion euros, paid by the young people and those yet to be born. 

            Markus Kurth (Greens): But distributed over 20 years!

It is now well established that these generations will not at the outset receive from the pension account what they may pay in; in any event, that the increasing contribution for each employee will soon amount to nearly a year’s vacation. The question is whether these generations can then still at all afford a vacation. 

All of that, dear colleagues, needs not be. It is possible to stabilize the pension system, long-term and prudently. I am thus glad to here today bring in our motion [Drucksache 20/11847] with the title “For a Secure Pension for Our Children”, which does precisely that: Secures the pension long-term, and in fact quite without new debts. 

That will be possible by means of a goal-oriented savings plan for which the state pays in monthly 100 euros for every child of a German citizen, born here and living here permanently up to the age of 18. What is gathered there shall then be administered by a community foundation [Gemenschaftsstiftung]. As a result of the long time period and the compound interest effect, it is possible, with a very reasonable commitment, to save up real wealth specific to a person. We are speaking here of a total 21,600 euros per child, stretched as was said over 18 years. That yields, with a return on capital of four percent, around 214,000 euros. Dear colleagues, that is a generations capital – sensible, feasible and affordable. 

Many thanks.

[trans:tem]

 

Beatrix von Storch, July 5, 2024, Pro-Life and Criminal Law

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/182, pp. 23698-23699. 

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

The left-greens can primarily do one thing: Discover ideological fighting words. Today, a new one: Sidewalk harassment [Gehsteigbelästigung], discovered by gender ideologue Ulrike Lembke. 

Filiz Polat (Greens): What rubbish is this, then?

All forms of relevant harassment are nevertheless today culpable, or are a violation of an ordinance. 

            Christina Baum (AfD): Right!

Thus why now Gehsteigbelästigung? An Orwellian newspeak. 

You want to demolish basic rights of Christians and defenders of life. For you, it is not about climate clingers who block hundreds of thousands of motorists, or about tens of thousands of leftist extremists seeking to prevent with violence an AfD party day, and also not about Islamists who in their fighting prayers conquer our public space. You find all of that to be fantastic or democratic or acceptable. Yet when Christians and defenders of life make use of their right to freedom of opinion or freedom of assembly, then you hollow out [drehen Sie hohl]. 

The Federal Administrative Court on 23 May 2023 clearly held that defenders of life may demonstrate in front of pro-family abortion centers. 

            Filiz Polat (Greens): What then is that for a term?

I cite: 

“There is in a pluralistic society no right to remain entirely exempt from the confrontation with divergent religious presentations or opinions.”

With that, all is said. 

You present in your draft law the assertion that, by means of sidewalk harassment, counseling offices and abortion clinics would be hindered in their activity, or those pregnant restrained from entering them. 

Canan Bayram (Greens): No, the women are hindered in their counseling possibilities. You need to read it correctly, Frau von Storch!

A dumb thing, that is a dumb thing! You know that. For that, there is no statistic, there is no survey, there are no police reports, there is simply nothing. You discover a problem which does not exist so that you have a reason to proceed with state repression against Christians and defenders of life. 

It is little surprising that the preparation for this comes from the Heinrich Böll Foundation, which in 2021 published an evaluation with the title, “Possibilities of Statutory New Regulation in the Conflict Field of Sidewalk Harassment”. The author: Sina Fontana. And here it becomes interesting, since Frau Fontana has written another evaluation with the title, “Universal Women’s Rights and Islamic Law”. 

            Götz Frömming (AfD): Oh! An interesting alliance!

Fontana therein wrote that the Scharia is quite wonderfully compatible with women’s rights. That is the Greens: Criminalize Christian prayers because against women’s rights, but praise and extol Scharia because good for women’s rights. 

            Christina Baum (AfD): Unbelievable!

The central point: Who like the Greens and the Linke defend Scharia, for them it is not about women’s rights, but for them it is about the fight against our culture.           

Canan Bayram (Greens): You have a Scharia fetish, Frau von Storch!

And in this culture war, the green Verbot parties want to silence critics, naturally with friendly support of the FDP. One prayer or the protest of defenders of life: 5,000 euro fine. Here in the Bundestag, to name a specific first name in a specific context: 1,000 euro fine. The Green catalogue of fines for forbidden expressions will soon become very long. 

            Gero Clemens Hocker (FDP): Expensive for you, Frau von Storch!

This law is unconstitutional and breathes the spirit of a totalitarian Green ideology. 

Canan Bayram (Greens): A court still decides, and not you, what is compatible with the constitution!

And the CDU wants to forbid the prayers, but thinks for that the right of assembly suffices; you have indeed said it, and Frau Breiler also on Wednesday in committee. Alone the FDP – not alone the FDP is responsible, but it shares in all of this. 

            Lukas Köhler (FDP): Your confusion is noted.

Alone the AfD stands for defense of life and freedom of opinion. 

Ladies and gentlemen, to me you will not forbid prayers, and also not the expression of the male name of Markus. 

 

[trans: tem]

Mariana Harder-Kühnel, April 15, 2024, Abortion

AfD Kompakt, April 15, 2024. 

Federal Family Minister Lisa Paus already made clear, before the formation of this Commission, that her political goal is general impunity for aborted pregnancies. Even from its name, it may be concluded that for this Ampel government it has at no time been about an unbiased “Whether”, but only about the “How” of taking down the hurdles for a termination of pregnancy. Consequently, the thereby constituted working groups were extensively filled with women who themselves in the past either had attracted attention with politically approved positions, or had been active for corresponding associations like “Pro Familia” or the “Deustchen Juristinnenbund”. 

In the Commission report, the focus is one-sidedly shifted from defense of unborn life to the alleged self-determination rights of women. The hereto given jurisprudence of the Federal Constitutional Court is thereby fully disregarded, and a liberalization of abortion law frankly presented as constitutionally imperative [verfassungsrechtlich geboten]. How the resulting defenselessness of unborn children to the end of the 22^nd week of pregnancy is reconcilable with their human dignity guaranteed by the Basic Law, the report nevertheless does not explain. 

The Ampel undertakes the public attempt to annul the defense of unborn life in favor of the right to abortion. The recommendations of its Commission merely serve as a first step of a long-term project to establish abortion as a natural “human right”. This hides the serious danger that the priority [Stellenwert] of human life in social consciousness will be generally degraded. This under all circumstances must be prevented. 

 

[trans: tem]

Mariana Harder-Kühnel, November 16, 2023, Islamization

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/137, pp. 17298-17299. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

Certainly in the last days has it become clear: The alleged conspiracy theory of an increasing Islamization of Germany is in fact a terrifying reality. 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Such nonsense! 

The pictures of pro-Hamas demonstrations on German streets allow no other explanation: A situation over which you are now overheated, yet a situation which you have brought about. 

These demonstrations are only the current high point of a creeping Islamization of Germany which is expressed in many facets: So-called honor killings, forced marriages, yet which is also manifested in the symbolic occupation in day-cares and elementary schools by means of wearing the children’s head scarf, and in polygamy which unfortunately becomes ever more prevalent. All of this is the result of our own weakness, of a woke culture, which hates all that is one’s own and our cultural identity as well as our tradition. And this self-hate makes one susceptible: To welcome culture and to mass migration, 

            Lamya Kaddor (Greens): Apparently you really need to hate yourself.

to children’s head scarves and to polygamy. It becomes high time to esteem one’s own, instead of sacrificing it to the foreigners. Otherwise, Germany becomes a caliphate. And we want no caliphate. We want a Germany that remains German, dear friends. 

Let us thus begin with the little ones. Let us ban the head scarf for children under 14 years in schools and day-cares. Since this head scarf for little girls is nothing other than a continual bodily and psychic disciplining. Free running, playing, swimming, etc., with it is scarcely possible. The writer Fatma Bläser, who as a child was herself forced to wear a head scarf, sees therein an “endangerment of children’s well-being”. The head scarf may become for young girls a “second skin” by which they are robbed of their freedom and childhood. It suppresses the children of today and makes them the suppressed women of tomorrow – and that may no longer be. 

And no, the children’s head scarf has nothing to do with religious freedom, since there is in Islam no religious precept for children to wear it. Until a few years ago, it was fully unusual in Islamic countries. 

The state of law is not allowed to tolerate it when little girls are thereby abused for transporting Islamist messages into our kindergartens and schools. For it is nothing other than political child abuse, what is happening here. This political child abuse needs to be forbidden; since it leads to parallel societies, it leads to the dis-integration of young girls and to the suppression of women. Such power demonstrations of political Islam have nothing to lose in Germany. 

These days, this becomes more clear than ever. The French and Austrians have long since recognized this and forbidden the head scarf in schools – in France besides, with the votes of the socialists. Let us thus defend young girls from the head scarf, and let us defend Germany from parallel societies! 

Polygamous marriages are also an expression of these parallel societies and they lead to a parallel justice. Where that leads to is shown in the many so-called honor killings. A stop to them must  be ordered. To them must be opposed law and order, and in fact our law and our order. Here, the statistical registration of polygamous marriages in Germany is required. Here, a general ban on religious early marriage is required. Here, polygamous marriages concluded in foreign countries need to be annulled. Here are required rigorous penalties for violations against the ban on bigamous marriage. 

Children’s head scarves and polygamy do not go in our country. Germany may no longer decay into a multicultural test laboratory; since it is not compatible with these imported conflicts. There must finally again 

            Vice-president Yvonne Magwas: Please come to a conclusion.

be recollected its culture and tradition. Germany must finally again be German. 

Many thanks.

  

[trans: tem]

Martin Reichardt, November 9, 2023, Children’s Basic Security

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/134, 16885-16886. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. 

The Children’s Basic Security [Kindergrundsicherung] will be praised by the green Ampel as a heart’s project. Yet we all certainly know what actually are the heart’s projects of this green Ampel: Disconnection of the climate-friendly nuclear power plants, weapons deliveries to war zones, 

            Nina Stahr (Greens): The theme!

comprehensive de-industrialization of Germany and unbridled mass immigration. That is the political framework with which you drive families in Germany into poverty. Yet, for that, you will be rightly punished throughout Germany at the elections, and das ist gut so. 

            Wolfgang Strengmann-Kuhn (Greens): Pride comes before a fall!

The expenditures in connection with flight and migration alone in this year amount to 48.2 billion euros. 

            Götz Frömming (AfD): At least!

For your big toss for families, you have a crummy 2.4 billion left over. And that is a scandal which speaks for itself. 

All of this of course becomes the more perverse as your entire social rhetoric is continually sabotaged by your own concrete policy. What you give to families on one side, you take away from them on the other side. The effect of your Kindergrundsicherung immediately dissolves  into nothing in the face of shocks which families receive in regards purchasing, the glance at the corresponding accounting and the energy prices, ladies and gentlemen.

So it is to be designated as one thing only, namely a labeling swindle. And here we have once again politically placed you, ladies and gentlemen. 

            Wolfgang Strengmann-Kuhn (Greens): Oh!

For the Kindergrundsicherung, it is so as for the Bürgergeld [citizens’ wage]. Much money has been inequitably pumped into imported poverty since 2015. The number of foreign children in receipt of transfer benefits has tripled since 2010. 

Kai Whittaker (CDU/CSU): Here, someone apparently has not at all peeked at the law! Had no desire to read the legal text, Herr colleague. Or what? 

Martin Gassner-Herz (FDP): It was too complicated for him! He understood nothing!

In 2010, it was 303,962 children, this year it is 935,000 children, most of whom come from Syria and the Ukraine. And I say to you: The opinion of the people in this country makes clear that the understanding for a policy which gives away the social benefits to all the world and drives one’s own people into poverty has finally been used up, ladies and gentlemen. 

            Wolfgang Strengmann-Kuhn (Greens): Crude nonsense! 

The Kindergrundsicherung is an additional instrument for the financial benefit of all the world and provides an additional incentive for migration into our moreover wasted social system, ladies and gentlemen. 

            Emilia Fester (Greens): Can you not for once think of something new?

In addition, the Kindergrundsicherung is an additional building block within the left-green reconstruction of society. It is in line with an entire chain of similarly mounted projects, as, for example, the so-called children’s rights in the Basic Law. All of these projects have one thing in common: The child shall be removed from the family social relation and transferred into the hands of a supposedly kindly, leftist political state. And we will not let you get away with that! 

            Anke Hennig (SPD): That is just ridiculous, what you are saying here! 

Nina Stahr (Greens): Because you do not tolerate that children have their own opinion! Inconceivable!

You propagandize for the de-coupling of the child from its parents. Greens and SPD especially want state command over the children’s beds. Yet we will prevent that, ladies and gentlemen. 

            Nina Stahr (Greens): We want that children have rights! That is a difference!

The families, the parents – that is for all of you just a burdensome intermediate level which hides a risk. You want that children be raised and financed not by their parents, but better by leftist ideologues, and exactly so raised as you would gladly have it. Yet this also we will not allow, ladies and gentlemen.   

            Stephanie Aeffner (Greens): You haven’t cast a glance at the law!

In conclusion, the following may be said: With this law, you go a further step along the way, well-known by you, to the disempowerment [Entmündigung] of the parents, the disempowerment of families, and the happiness of all the world. 

            Vice-president Aydan Özoğuz: Please come to a conclusion.

Yet we of the AfD will not participate in this. For we as the only ones say: Our families and our Germany first! 

            Annika Klose (SPD): Name one concrete example! Name just one!

Many thanks.

           Anke Hennig (SPD): Ridiculous! 

 

[trans: tem]

Ulrike Schielke-Ziesing, September 5, 2023, Family Ministry

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/117, 14461-14462. 

Right honorable Frau Minister. Ladies and gentlemen. 

As first section of the sectoral ministries, we discuss this year the Family Ministry budget. I wished that the serial order would also reflect the government’s setting of priorities. Yet that unfortunately indeed remains just a wish. 

We have now already heard it many times. The big theme in this year are the savings guidelines and primarily your decision to cut, as it happens, the parental allowance [Elterngeld]. You and your colleagues from the red and green delegations then gladly refer to the guidelines from the Finance Ministry, and then all of you in the Ampel openly blame one another for this decision; we have today already heard it. The citizens, or in this case the parents, as always pay the bill. 

Frau Minister, you have the departmental responsibility for your Ministry and your budget. You alone thus bear the responsibility for which places will be cut. 

Here I would gladly remind you that you are the Family Minister. The word “Family” is not there for nothing and not for nothing in the first position. Why do I say this? Because apparently at the budget deliberations within your  government you indeed have not represented the interests of the the families, but rather the particular interests of your green colleagues and the interests of your ideological friends in diverse, so-called non-governmental organizations and networks with queer, gender or whatever ideologies. Say it: The families needed once again to be neglected. 

Frau Minister, as it happens, to save in regards Elterngeld is the last thing that would occur to me as the AfD delegation’s budget member. There is still plenty in the expenditures in your Ministry where one can save – we ever again pointed it out to you and your coalition with our motions to amend in the past. One need only correctly set the priorities. 

I want however to direct the attention to additional places in your budget draft. There are additional areas where you have regularly cut, namely in regards the child and youth policy around a full 220 million euros, and in regards the volunteer services around a total of 75 million euros. Also, the cutting in the area of the future package for exercise, culture and health of around 95 percent – that is, almost to zero – we regard most critically. 

There prevails a near unanimity among experts who say that the Corona preventive measures have inflicted an essentially greater harm on the children than has been admitted, especially as it concerns their sports performance. Meanwhile, only 12 percent of children are categorized as “fit” – 12 percent! To just now save in regards one of the most important programs which should counteract this, or indeed to let the program run out completely, that is a fully false signal. 

Where you have once again effected no savings measures is in regards the entire NGO network, as by chance in the program “Demokratie leben!”. Here, 200 million euros continue to flow unhindered to dubious organizations and associations which, among other things, preach Islamic fundamentalism or indoctrinate children with gender ideology. 

You also have not saved in regards the promotion of the youth organizations of political parties. That means, all parties here represented – with the exception of one, naturally – get additional tax money for their “non-political” work. 

And naturally was nothing saved in regards the so-called anti-discrimination commissioner. Frau Ataman is allowed in these times to lay hold of a budget multiplied nearly three times since 2020, 

            Felix Döring (SPD): That’s not right! There is less there! Have you at all read                        the draft?

And I am sure that you, as in the previous budget deliberations, will extend even more money. For you see overall discrimination, and the more discrimination you discover, the more money you of course require to fight against it. 

            Felix Döring (SPD): Das sind Falschnachrichten! 

            Sönke Rix (SPD): Fake news!

Many questions arise in regards the child basic security. The world is haunted by quite different numbers. Of late was there talk of 2.4 billion euros – not from next year, but first from 2025. On the website of your Ministry, the most comprehensive social reform in years and the mounting of a real fight against poverty will be spoken of. It should thus become the big push. 

Yet if one now considers that the Kindergeld presently costs around 50 billion euros per year, and in regards the child basic security we are speaking of 2.4 billion euros, that does not sound so big a push. 

            Leni Breymaier (SPD): Yawn! Yawn!

The raise will not even cushion the inflation, to say nothing of creating an increase for the families. Even if you figure in an additional rise in the Bürgergeld [citizens’ wage] for children from 2025, the numbers do not suit the basic security which you so proudly present. Yet on that we will deliberate in the next budget, not in this one. 

In conclusion, we can say of this budget plan: We of the AfD delegation see a considerable need for correction in regards the draft budget of your Ministry, and of course nevertheless look forward to the budget deliberations. 

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): To be sure! 

I am grateful.

 

[trans: tem]

Ulrike Schielke-Zeising, July 17, 2023, Old Age Pensions and Poverty

AfD Kompakt, July 17, 2023. 

An increase of 15 percent in one, single year: Such figures do not fall from heaven, they are the result of a total failure of pensions policy. All the talk of a “rich” Germany alters nothing of the facts: Now already every third pensioner receives a pension below the basic security (2021: 853 euros); a large portion of the old age pensioners are scarcely above that. 

So far today, more than a quarter of all pensioners are considered “officially” as poor – that in the future will be the rule rather than the exception. It is becoming more difficult: Germany is the laggard in Europe as is it pertains to real property and asset formation. That means: For whom the statutory pension no more suffices, he falls unchecked into poverty. Precisely that is happening now. Exploding living standard costs, rising rents, all the – avoidable – consequences of wrong political decisions, impact unchecked on the seniors’ living situation. 

Of a 3,000 euro inflation premium, as the ministers and state secretaries receive, the pensioners can only dream. And, thus far, they are still poor, even with a pension increase (most recently, 4.39 percent or 5.86 percent in respectively western or eastern Germany). Since this, as is known, is accounted for in the basic security. In other words: He who has, to him will be given; who cannot defend himself, goes away empty. That is the outcome of the “progressive coalition” in Germany. 

How it may otherwise, we have already indicated in our key points paper on old age security, and presently with our motion (Drs. 20/7461). 

 

[trans: tem]

Christina Baum, December 16, 2022, Vaccination Side-effects

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/77, pp. 9239-9240.

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

In a few days we will again celebrate Christmas, the feast you would have preferred to forbid to people in the past two years,

            Andreas Philippi (SPD): What!

            Andrew Ullmann (SPD): Such rubbish!

            Marei-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (FDP): Not Christmas. You ought                                        to be forbidden!

the feast which many experienced for the last time – in solitude, and then dying in solitude and being buried in solitude. This picture is representative of the entire suffering which you have inflicted on people in these two years. The compulsory preventive measures decided on by you have brought unbelievably so many tears and pain upon our country that this time no one will forget.  

            Andrew Ullmann (SPD): The AfD brings pain and suffering!

Children were compelled to mask and set in a corner separated from their school comrades. They needed to freeze at open windows only because they could not wear no mask for reasons of health. The test swab was painfully shoved in the nose, and each time their pulse beat faster

Ralf Stegner (SPD): You would have been able to recite more pleasant                Christmas stories here!

from fear of a positive result with attendant isolation. One mother wrote to all members that in the morning her daughter no longer wanted to get up because the school was a hell. Just as this left my colleagues in the Landtag cold, the people’s suffering did not reach you in the Bundestag.

            Nezahat Baradari (SPD): Such rubbish!

            Lars Lindemann (FDP): The Christmas story goes otherwise.

And just as you were wrong in regards these preventive measures, you are also wrong as to your extolling vaccination. The trivialized little jabs, which should guarantee for an entire year complete protection,

            Andrew Ullmann (SPD): The word “science”, you do not know by name!

without side-effects,

            Leni Breymaier (SPD): No one said that!

became an injection which guaranteed neither protection of others nor oneself nor a protection against a serious case,

            Andrew Ullmann (SPD): The AfD does not understand science!

yet which can bring serious side-effects up to death.

            Christos Pantazis (SPD): Humbug!

I cite Dr. Beate Jäger, internist, from a ZDF report of December 4, 2022:

            I have treated children here who could not longer lift the head,

            Andrew Ullmann (SPD): Internists treat children?

who could not speak. I yesterday saw the mother of a girl who for 8 months stares at the ceiling and must be fed; previously completely healthy…

These are just a few cases of tens of thousands who were vaccinated utterly without need because for them Corona never presented a risk.

            Andrew Ullmann (SPD): The risk is the AfD!

All of you here, from the far left to the CDU, are responsible for that, for what has happened and also for what is still happening.           

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): What happened to them?

            Andrew Ullmann (SPD): The AfD is responsible for division!

So as to avoid further harms, I urgently beg you: Indemnify and rehabilitate the victims, and protect our children,

            Andrew Ullmann (SPD): We protect our children by abolishing the AfD!

so that you may finally end these dangerous vaccination experiments!

And stop with this mask mania! I cite Florian Hoffmann, chief doctor at a children’s intensive-care station in Munich: In many German children’s clinics presently prevail situations which recall those of the third world. The stations are full to bursting, and parents with seriously ill children need in part to spend the night on bunks. – Responsible for the increased incidences of serious RSV [respiratory syncytial virus] cases are, according to Hoffmann and other physicians, compulsory masks, closing of day-cares and contact bans.

            Andrew Ullmann (SPD): Correlation and causality need to be understood!

Every single one of you really should very precisely ponder whether he wants to further burden himself with blame. Vote in favor of our motions [Drucksache 20/4891].

            Kathrin Vogler (Linke): No, no way! No thanks!

That would be a start.

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

Ulrike Schielke-Ziesing, November 22, 2022, Family Ministry and Lobbyists

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/68, p. 7940.

Herr President. Dear colleagues. Honorable citizens.

We stand at the beginning of a recession. While savings measures will be spoken of, the people called upon to save and millions of families are on the edge of despair, money for unnecessary prestige projects will be expended, lobby associations taken into consideration and spared for false purposes. The Family Ministry budget is exemplary of this. It sets false priorities and is thoroughly soaked in green ideology.

For false priorities, the “Language Day Care” program – cost factor: 250 million euros per year – is the best example. This program is the life’s blood of many day cares. Over 7,000 professionals are thereby financed nationwide so as to promote the language development of the children. The latest studies indicate to us how important this is, whereby early childhood language education fell to an unheard level thanks to the Corona preventive measures.

And what do you do as nearly the first official act? In the Family Ministry this program was eliminated. Following a great wave of protest, the Ministry now comes about and yet again 109 million euros is posited for use in the interval – that is, until June 2023 – money which otherwise was erroneously provided with a stop notation.

Two billion euros were grandiosely announced for the new Good Day Care Law which is now called the “Day Care Quality Law”. That however is a potent smoke screen. There has of course flowed just zero cents more so far by means of this Good Day Care Law.

Where you cut, once again completely lacking transparency, is for example in the investment programs for the child care financing. In the years 2020 and 2021, there was still foreseen one billion euros. Were thus a balance sum for the day care promotion reckoned, the account would appear as follows: Minus 230 million euros for the Federal programs, inclusive of the language day care, minus 500 million euros for the investment programs. For 2023, that makes a minus of 750 million euros which is omitted nationwide. That is inconceivable for a Family Minister.

Yet you plainly set your priorities differently; since, ja, there must be money for your lobbyist colleagues and for the green ideology agenda of your ministry. For the so-called measures for strengthening variety and tolerance, 200 million euros are again foreseen. That thereby organizations with a direct connection in the Moslem Brotherhood will also be promoted – all the same.

For your lobbyist colleagues there is an abundance of money. That is best seen in regards the anti-discrimination commissioner, Frau Ataman.

            Leni Breymaier (SPD): Good woman!

Her office, completely detached from any responsibility, next year receives 13.4 million euros. That is fully 250 percent more than in 2021. So as to raise the money for that moreover, the women’s homes were cut.

            Denise Loop (Greens): That is not right!

If I may then continue in the list: There are again 10 million euros for the political party youth organizations. In clear text: A gift of the taxpayers to the political organizations like Grüne Jugend, Jusos, Linkes Jugend and Co.. 10 million euros for welfare associations for the “Counseling of Refugees”. I can here will imagine that soon with this next motion, the citizens’ money is imparted for “counseling” – and, and, and.

The crowning of the whole was nevertheless seriously the coalition’s motion in the settlement sitting of two weeks ago. Without shame, you have actually explicitly given money to specified firms. There were the yearly payment to the PHINEO AG of 350,000 euros or the 1.34 million euros for LGBTQ projects – the most of which, 850,000 euros, explicitly for Pinkdot.

Normally, duties and goals for a ministry’s budget are defined, then money placed at disposal and the attendant guidelines written out, to which the firms can then apply. Yet it is thus very burdensome and costly. It is just much more convenient to name an actual firm and to write it in the budget.

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): Unbelievable!

The entire bureaucracy thus saves. It is only about a trifling 1.2 million euros. Who should be troubled by that? That is cronyism par excellence.

While the people will be called upon to save, while debts are made as if there was no tomorrow, here without shame money will be distributed to lobbyist associations. That is impudent. And it is incomprehensible why the FDP participates in all this nonsense.

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): I well understand it: Lust for positions.

 We of the AfD in any case will not share in this title and this budget – not as long as ideology and lobbyism are placed above the needs of the families in this country.

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]