Marc Bernhard, December 1, 2022, Home Ownership

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/73, pp. 8602-8603.

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

In Germany, 75 percent of renters dream of their own four walls. Yet only the fewest have succeeded in also realizing this dream; since, according to the ECB, the Germans are the poorest in the euro zone. Thus, the assets of an average Greek family are double as high as that of a German family, in Spain and Italy even four times as high as with us. And in regards the pension level, Germany with just 48 percent is far behind. Spain, for example, has 83 percent, Austria 89 percent and Italy even 91 percent.

We have the world’s highest energy prices, and we have with just 45 percent the lowest rate of home ownership in the EU. Here in Berlin it is even just 15 percent, while in France 64 percent, in Italy 72 percent, in Greece 76 percent, in Czechia 80 percent and in Slovakia even 92 percent live within their own four walls. The European cut thus lies over 70 percent. We thus have not only the highest energy prices, the smallest household assets with the lowest pension level, but also the lowest home ownership rate in the EU.

Now the inflation also devours the rest of the citizens savings. It is therefore now certainly much more important to bring as many people as possible within their own four walls. Since this is the best inflation protection, the best safeguard for elders, and provides in crises like today’s stability and security to people. And therefore we want to make Germany from a land of renters into a land of homeowners.

Yet then why is Germany at all the taillight in the EU’s home ownership rate? The German Bundesbank states in a study that for one thing it lies, in international comparison, in the much too high real property sales taxes [Grunderwerbsteuer]; and for another, that the mortgage interest, unlike as in many other countries, cannot be deducted even for the self-use dwelling. Yet that was once in Germany otherwise, as in the administration of Helmut Kohl, – it is already quite a while – the costs for one’s own home could be deducted from taxes. That then made home ownership possible, despite astronomical rates well over 10 percent.  

We demand in our motion [Drucksache 20/3204] that the real property sales tax be lowered to 3.5 percent throughout Germany, and before all, that the purchase of one’s own first home must be completely free of taxes. That would of course finally eliminate the social injustice that large capital companies pay practically no real property sales tax, while the normal citizen always needs to pay for everything.

In addition, the prices for home ownership need again to become affordable. For that, the construction guidelines and the cost-driving climate guidelines are to be reduced, the contract procedures accelerated and the rural area finally again made more attractive. Since while in the urban centers 2 million affordable dwellings are lacking, 1.7 million dwellings in rural areas stand empty.  

Let us finally do it like our European neighbors and as the German Bundesbank recommends: With one’s own four walls, we attain for the people inflation protection, an old age safeguard, stability and security. Let us finally make Germany from a country of renters into a country of owners! 

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

Gereon Bollmann, September 29, 2022, Data Storage and Child Abuse

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/57, pp. 6274-6275.

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

I think the course so far of the debate indicates that we all might be very well agreed on at least one point: That the sexualized violence against children is one of the most horrific of crimes. Actually, that is fairly clear. And that the fight against it is a policy goal of the utmost importance certainly is not in question. The data protection however is. And because it is, once again in the last weeks two governments have suffered shipwreck before the European High Court: The French and the German. Both governments once again did not sufficiently take into view the freedoms [Freiheitsrechte] of citizens. We therefore now require a careful assessment of legal interests – and no hasty reaction of the adherents of a surveillance state.

Now already three of four cases of sexualized violence against children can be cleared up. The American child protection organization NCMEC watches over nearly all internet activity in this direction. From this organization the BKA receives the necessary data, and indeed quite without retained data storage [Vorratsdatenspeicherung] in Germany. No one though can seriously reckon how high the clarification rate would be if all IP addresses were stored. There is thus no cause for an excessive hurry.

Perhaps at this point: Frau Lindholz, you have certainly opened the debate with your proposal. You are an advocate for family law. I was a judge in the family senate of a regional appellate court. You have of course cited the passage accurately. Yet at the same time, you have not addressed the conditions which are in the European High Court’s decision.

Günther Krings (CDU/CSU): Namely?

We have been referred to it by the colleague of the Linke, and also Herr Jacobi has basically made reference to it: It is admissible, although plainly just conditional.

Andrea Lindholz (CDU/CSU): Yes! Specifically in this case is it admissible! Exactly these cases have been explicitly singled out, Herr colleague!

What namely, Frau Lindholz, is in play? With your permission, Frau President, I cite another point. So listen well! Accordingly, the following is possible:

…traffic and venue data, which have been stored for ten or four weeks, can however be of very exact consequence to private lives of persons

            Günther Krings (CDU/CSU): Yet it’s not about that!

            Andrea Lindholz (CDU/CSU): It’s about IP addresses!

whose data was stored – perhaps on habits of daily life, permanent or predominant places of abode

            Andrea Lindholz (CDU/CSU): It’s not about that!

            Günther Krings (CDU/CSU): That is quite a different theme!

– it is nevertheless the consequence, Herr Dr. Krings – daily, or in other cycles, ensuing changes of place,

Andrea Lindholz (CDU/CSU): Yet that has nothing to do with our motion!

activities practiced, social relations of these persons, the social milieu in which they move – and especially, making possible the construction of profiles of these persons.

Günther Krings (CDU/CSU): We are already long since out! It is simply not the same!

Andrea Lindholz (CDU/CSU): Absence of theme!

Dear colleagues, it almost cannot be stressed abundantly enough that this would affect almost exclusively persons who have nothing at all to do with criminality. It further says in the decision that the fight against serious criminality is indeed of great significance, yet per se could not justify the necessity of a preventive measure of general and undifferentiated retained data storage.

I come to conclusion, Frau President. – On precisely these grounds we reject a storage of data without cause. Only with sufficient suspicion and – I stress – only with a judicial order are interventions in informational self-determination acceptable; not however by means of a legal free ride ticket.

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]

 

Mariana Harder-Kühnel, August 2, 2022, Kindergeld

AfD Kompakt, August 2, 2022.

The European High Court [EuGH]’s decision increases the pressure on our social state and on those who must by their work generate the billions in tax money which here will be distributed on a grand scale. The EuGH no longer evaluates Kindergeld [child allowance] as a social benefit, since according to the opinion of the judges it does not serve for the guaranteeing of the living subsistence but for the compensation of the family costs [Ausgleich von Familienlastung]. The Court thereby again increases the incentive for abuse by migrants from southeast Europe and additional poor regions of the EU.

For comparison: The Kindergeld claim for three children for three months runs to some 2,000 euros in Germany. With a monthly average wage in Bulgaria of 800 euros, the income of German Kindergeld is more than lucrative. It is nevertheless the German taxpayers who finance the social state and not it happens Bulgarians seeking work. The basic idea of the freedom of movement in the EU is based on the employment of workers in other EU member states. Clearly not meant by that is the claim to more attractive social benefits. The Ampel is now obliged to find a sound legal solution so as to prevent further social tourism to Germany.

 

[trans: tem]