Tino Chrupalla, July 9, 2026, Merz Government II

German Bundestag, July 9, 2026, Plenarprotokoll 21/89, pp. 10868-10871.

[...] Let us come to healthcare reform and to the first day illness note, Herr 
Chancellor. And here again becomes clear that you really have null empathy,  
primarily for the citizens. Were such a proposal submitted by me and us, I 
would place myself before the voters. You however are full of mistrust and 
ill will in the face of the sick. Much more, you would thereby still further 
strain the already thin medical coverage. There are now full waiting rooms and 
long lines at the doctors' offices. There is actually shown that you apparently
do not at all know what proceeds out there in the country: Full waiting rooms, 
as was said, added to that the documentation obligations, overburdened health 
personnel; these then need to wait in line at the nearest doctor's office for an 
illness note. 

Herr Merz, such unmenschliche proposals will only be represented by politicians
who themselves seemingly never worked with the hands, but only have controlled
foreign capital from a manager's seat as an upper employee. 

Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): Does that apply to Frau Weidel?

Please do not get me wrong: I rejoice for everyone who in his calling is successful
and earns money. Those citizens who even perhaps came somewhat easier through 
these difficult times will nevertheless even so be burdened by your unpleasant 
approach to Politik.  

Wherein we also see you generally plan new costs. Just in the health field, the 
chronically ill and families will be burdened with the greatest costs - be it the reduced 
subvention for dental replacement, the obligatory costs of co-insurance for spouses, 
the rising costs for pharmacists, or the financing of gaps in the rescue service. All that 
damages the provision for young and old, their health and the attractiveness of our 
country. You drive with these measures remaining medical professionals out of the 
country. You worsen the health of middle- and low-earners - this is besides the 
majority of the citizens in Germany - the retirees and, before all, the future generations. 
Herr Merz, you also ever more leave the way of the sozial market economy. The bow 
is more quickly over-stretched than you actually think. 

The Alternative fur Deutschland is also here in position to build bridges, for the market regulates much in the area "Business and Economy". In the area of basic duties of the 

state, like health, education and infrastructure, or affordable energy, we in Germany see 

the state obliged. The people primarily need again to be at the center of Sozialpolitik, 

those who have contributed to creation of value and are also plainly active and will be active: Those are our children. With them stands and falls a sozial system. It thus can 

conclusively only be about using the savings potential of 12 billion euros in the area 
of Bürgergeld contributions for precisely this group of persons, so as to bring into 
employment all, namely those who are capable of work and are of corresponding 
age and thereby ending the state incentives for tax-financed non-work.

This concerns even so the immigrants into our sozial system, primarily from the 
Ukraine and from Syria, as precisely those who simply no longer want to 
work because they have settled themselves. Only with a strong focus may we 
strengthen the sozial accounts and, before all things, the community. We thus 
need to take in hand quite clear limitations and also formulate severe penalties 
for benefits abuse. These are exactly the important signs to the majority of 
citizens that thereby their hard work and willingness to perform again pays.
Germany can thus also again become family- and children-friendly. Like a 
thunderclap then the news of the planned cuts in the parents money hit all 
young families. You have spoken of families and children, Herr Merz. I am 
astonished that you at all formulated that. Yet which signs do these cuts send? 
What is this actually for priorities of this Federal  government? We have in 
Germany meanwhile the lowest birthrate since 1946. And what comes from 
this government, what pertains to family policy, what pertains to promotion?
Nothing. Null. That is really a disgrace for this country.

This Federal government wants to obligate everyone up to the 70th year of 
life to work, and invest preferably in panzers instead of children. It will play 
off the generations one against the other, and in the end commit the valuable 
tax money to none of either side.

You want the control of conflicts and wars not through diplomacy but through  
sanctions. These damage the German economy, the German people and the entire
European continent. Peace means prosperity, and prosperity is the basis of
security. 

Yet with horror I need see that you want to achieve the prosperity at the cost 
of peace. Massive upgrades and armament have nothing to do with the mandatory
fulfillment of alliance obligations. In the past twelve months, the spending for war 
weapons increased about 25 billion to over 124 billion euros. You regularly
celebrate your armaments intoxications, and have no one who wants to take up 
arms. The Federal Minister of Defense, Pistorius, needed to painfully experience
that following the reaction to approximately 300,000 questionnaires sent for 
military registration - merely a scarce 530 reports for voluntary service followed.

Beatrix von Storch (AfD): Hear, hear!

The German people quite obviously no longer want to have themselves made 
fit for war.

And the young generation has decided. The time of the War Minister is past. In 
place of being employed in the construction of a destructive war economy, there
needs finally again be at midpoint an impulse for a peaceful living together between
the peoples of Europe. The NATO could be an alliance of peace, and not the finance
machine of the Ukraine war.

For a conclusion, yet a brief remark on law, and on the obligation of parties for 
holding their party meetings. We are all legally obligated to the same conduct. Just so 
more reprehensible are the calls for violence of individual members of this sovereign 
house who have exchanged democracy for the right of might. We could see in Erfurt
who these are, who ostensibly defend our democracy. They of course have 
contributed to that Apollo journalists were victims of uncontrolled assaults and the 
split in our society was driven ever deeper. The security measures for our national
party meeting in Erfurt cost many weeks of preparation time by police and Bund 
security forces. I want in this place to state to all mission forces my express thanks. 

President Julia Klöckner: Please come to a final sentence.

Dialogue and diplomacy are also the basis for security and prosperity.

Many thanks.

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla, July 9, 2026, Merz Government I

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/89, pp. 10868-10871.

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear 
countrymen. - Dear countrymen.

Herr Chancellor, I really need say before all things that, in regards the first part 
of your government declaration, I really asked myself: Where do you live, actually?
In regards your statements, your wishes which you spread here, your polling
results must have gone through the roof. If one looked at that, you spoke  
of the costs of failures - of the costs of failures! I say to you: The costs of the 
failures rise everyday so long as you are Chancellor. Allow me please to 
continue with a citation: 

"That which the Social Democrats can do well is to make
debts, raise taxes and ever higher state spending. Now they 
give money to foreign people. We now have almost 900 
billion euros in state income. Can we occupy ourselves for 
once with the thought whether we have a problem on the 
spending side?"

End citation. The former Chancellor candidate of the CDU and CSU, Friedrich Merz, 
spread these understandable thoughts about one and a half years ago on 6 February
2025 on X. One may therein see, Herr Merz, what interests you in your idle talk 
of yesterday. It can be said, that is a mirror image of your entire Chancellorship.
It is and remains for you a unique tragedy. No one can rely on your word. You wriggle 
through autumn of reform, through reform spring, into the reform summer. In 
regards the duration, we take it you've been quite a time in a reform jam on the decaying
streets and bridges. A quarter of your government time has already run out, and we all 
know that the remaining time of this legislature until 2029 will pass by more quickly
than you believe - even if you hold on so long. You nevertheless cannot make me believe
that you had at all thought out the contested themes in the victory whirl of the spring 
of 2025.

Exactly so dishonest do you behave in the face of the citizens. The loss of trust in the 
word of this Federal government is scarcely still to be figured. You say the one thing, 
and as a rule first of all do nothing. As soon as something in the form of a law reaches 
the German Bundestag, you in the coalition are at least disagreed in the media or 
contradict yourselves on the public stage. Honestly said, I thought you in your parties
are somewhat further. All in all, you paralyze the economic and social progress. 

The Union in addition still walls itself in behind a firewall; for the party enemy 
identified by you gains ever more in approval, and you lose support and, before 
all things, credibility. You underlined this today with your speech. What however
is still not clear is, Herr Chancellor: If you in angst need to hide from us behind your
firewall, why do you actually at the same time make use of the proposals which were
worked up in our Bundestag delegation? 

Let us name it by name: You already long understood that you and your party need
to make Politik with our themes so as not to be swept from the political market, like 
the erstwhile FDP. Out of pure opportunism, you have turned left in a green direction
and drive in a circle without success. 

Your business model thereby further exhausted, you negotiate bad deals so as to 

remain in power. As example I just want to recall the climate and transformation 

fund. The increase in the billions of this budget item clearly did no harm to your 

election as Chancellor in the second round. Only, it appears you were, in your time 

out of politics, not really thus prepared for the leadership of a state. And that is 

logical, since BlackRock stands, ja, on the other side of the recipients of hard 

earned tax means which secure the return of your shareholders. 

Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): Ach herrje!

And precisely this you make clear with the budget Politik of your Federal 
government. Your cabinet in the 2027 Federal budget wanted to expend a 
total 555 billion euros. For that, the Federal Republic of Germany will be 
indebted by an additional 118.7 billion; with that of last year, over 200
billion euros of new debts. That is already double that of the original planning.   
Besides: Of the European treaties like Maastricht, Herr Chancellor, we 
no longer need speak at all. You for long no more observe them.

Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): How then would you 
do it, Herr Chrupalla? Tell for once!

I want to again remind you, Herr Merz: A state is no business firm quoted on the 
exchange, which in any case cannot at option be quickly purchased, wrecked 
and merged.

Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU):  Ever the same speech!

What however you could know: In regards to personnel and to processes, a 
state needs to be set up lean. And also there, this Federal government uses no 
savings potential in which for example it consistently takes into the state 
pension system the servants of the state, Herr Hoffmann. That would be a real reform.

 
How then do you want to still longer explain to the citizens that, for example, 
officials without a high income have at their disposal 70 percent already at 
pension age, and all others need to secure their retirement portion through ETF 
financial business, by which apparently armaments concerns still earn money 
for your war. And just in times of rising insolvencies, weak economic growth, of 
de-industrialization in the chemical industry, of the de facto elimination of mini-jobs, 
in times of war which make necessary the rebate at the pump, the sozial 
splitting needs to have an end. And just that which is financed by the community
needs to act as a part of the community. 

President Julia Klöckner: Herr member, do you permit an interim 
question from the ranks of the Union delegation, and that is from
Herr Alexander Hoffmann?

Bitte schön.

Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): Thanks, Herr Chrupalla, that 
you permit the interim question. I was of course well nigh 
astonished. You speak here for minutes and thereby do what you 
always plainly do: You bad mouth [quatscht] our country into 
a depression. 

Stephan Brandner (AfD): Na, na, na!

Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): You bad mouth our people 
into a depression, Afterwards, Frau Weidel will speak. She                                                       does precisely the same. Now I am happy that in your speech                                                    finally for once occurs a position which was clear on how the                                                   AfD would do it.

Bernd Baumann (AfD): We say that continually every day!

Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): That was the following position:
We reconstruct the pension account when the officials finally pay
into the pension. That was finally a concrete proposal. You have 
clearly occupied yourselves with funding it. I want to share with 
you - 

President Julia Klöckner: Excuse me. Quite briefly: It needs be 
possible when a member of your delegation permits a question
that you first listen to the question. Yet this also belongs with 
that: This is impulse control. Bitte.

Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): Thus, you are the delegation 
with the most interim questions, then you can also listen for 
once when someone else asks. How would that be, actually?
The AfD thus finally makes a concrete proposal. The officials 
pay into the pension account, and we thereby reconstruct the 
pension system. Herr Chrupalla, there are various studies - 
besides, the preceding pension commission also occupied itself
with this question - which have arrived actuarily at a fully clear 
result: The pension account cannot thereby be reformed and, 
before all, also not be placed on a stable footing, since opposed 
were corresponding payments costs. Apart from that, the officials
provision is fundamentally protected on that account. I now 
confront you with these studies and would gladly have your
answer whether you, against this background, still want to 
adhere to this epic proposal. 

Thus first, Herr Hoffmann. When I permit to you the question - you speak frequently
of the "delegitimization of parliament" to which we, ja, allegedly contribute - and when 
the leader of the opposition gives a speech here, then he speaks, and does not "bad
mouth", as you label it. 

Point one: You nevertheless always speak of civility [Anstand], and then I at least 
expect that you as State group chief of the CSU also have this civility. Point two: 
Yes, we in our demands have also included that all pay into the system of the 
Pension Insurance, officials also. 

Alice Weidel (AfD): And politicians!

Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): Do the math!

That is justice; it is about us. You have taken the politicians as a circle of persons 
which we have always supported. You espied this from us, because of course
ever more citizens demand this. That it does not proceed from today to tomorrow, 
that officials - with a terminal date regulation - should pay in, this is fully clear.
Yet it should nevertheless be. Why? A pensioner in Germany receives an average
3,400 euro pension for the same employment time 

Alice Weidel (AfD): Clearly less!

of a tradesman, a member of the Mittelsand, a quite normal doctor, a nurse, thus 
all those who have paid into the retirement system. The average pension of these 
is nevertheless 1,200 euros for men and 1,000 euros for women. Do you find that just?
Precisely that is the injustice, and that is the two-class society in the retirement which
we want to abolish. 

Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): Question not answered!

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla, March 18, 2026, War, Migration, Budget

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/64, pp. 7667-7668. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen. 

Our position on the new war in the Near East has proved to be right. Ever more politicians at home and abroad share our concern, among others the Chancellor. The aim is to protect the population and civil institutions, as well as to end the war as quickly as possible. 

Herr Merz, from this place I have thanked your predecessor in office, Herr Scholz, for that he delivered no Taurus cruise missiles to the Ukraine. I see hope in that you follow him in this regard and avert harm from the German people. Since on one thing all here in the German Bundestag need to unconditionally agree: Only one commitment [Bekenntnis] is required which we as parliamentarians and politicians give to everyone: That is the commitment to our country and to our citizens. 

            Till Steffen (SPD): For you, that turns out to be, ja, difficult!

By these were we elected, and in the interest of these we need to make Politik. Germany was not defended in the Hindukush, nor is it defended in the Strait of Hormuz. 

            Helge Limburg (Green): And should not be governed from Russia!

Those who begin wars need to submit themselves to questions as to their goals and exit strategies. Just so should those who begin continuing wars be able to put forward evidence even for these. The same standards and rules apply for all. Herr Merz, you have said it: Only so can the trust of the world’s people be maintained. These, to a large extent, in this case have been shocked. 

Ladies and gentlemen, for us it must now first of all be about guaranteeing the security within the German borders. To that belongs consistently meeting the Islamism ever again flaming up here in Germany. 

            Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): Yet that is a contradiction which you’ve noted,                                nicht wahr?

The demands of my party in that regard are to apply the pertinent law to full extent and, before all, to implement it. Stop the proactive migration of potential criminals, and finally deport the foreign citizens become criminals to their own countries! Asylum is residency for a time, and needs to be thus managed. These measures do not contradict human dignity, and do not condemn wholesale one or another of the groups. They are much more covered by applicable law in Germany. 

You see that the discussion at the European level has long since proceeded. The demand for asylum centers outside the European borders is meanwhile one common to the Union and to the Alternative für Deutschland. And, Herr Merz, who is needed – and at the European level – that, you do not decide. That, the people decide. 

Herr Chancellor, in this regard, exert pressure on our neighbors, particularly in eastern Europe. The Dublin agreement is not just understandings, but finally needs to be followed. We require reliable partners in all questions, and in the migration debate. 

Ladies and gentlemen, if we as Germans have learned something, then it is that for no war in the world should we let ourselves be yoked to the cart of others, by no one and for no interests which are not ours. We know better how a country destroyed by war is to be reconstructed. It was our forefathers and we ourselves who will forever bear that scar. That, we will and cannot expect of no other country. For that, German Politik in the year 2026 should stand. To that, quite clearly does not belong prolonging conflicts and wars by money and material benefits at the cost of the German taxpayers. 

            Metin Hakverdi (SPD): „Deutsche“! „National“!

The Ukraine war is just so little our war as the one in the Near East. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): You need a couple of history courses!

Therefore needs finally be an end to financial packages and military support! For certainly in this new, dangerous world situation, we need the well-being and the problems here in Germany to be back at the center of our Politik. 

            Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): Yes, then you do that on a lonely island!

I have enlarged on domestic security. Certainly in regards this and all proposals which are in Germany’s interest, you can count on the support of the Alternative für Deutschland. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): Which we can well do without!

Where you need to figure with opposition is in regards your special debts or, as you call them, special funds. Not only do these massively burden the future of our children and grandchildren, no, it has happened exactly as what we here in many debates for a year have prophesied: This Federal government flogs ever more special funds through the German Bundestag because the basic expenditures need to be secured. You, Herr Merz, and your social democratic Finance Minister Klingbeil, have not managed to keep house with billions in tax intake. On that account, you need the expensive special debts so as to secure the core budget. That is neither sozial nor just. Not a cent can thereby flow into the decaying infrastructure of streets, railways, education or health. Not one euro do you invest long-term in the well-being of the German citizens. 

For you, time is running out. Instead of constantly building walls and losing yourself in partisan politics, you need now to finally be ready to make an audit, to prioritize your expenditures, and so far relieve the German economy, the Mittelstand, and the local trades that these do not run away from us, as we are seeing every day. Finally apply the red pencil and strike out superfluous taxes and guidelines which burden everything! I demand of you no world miracle, but a speedy action in regards the high energy and fuel prices. 

And, yes, we need to make it a theme, since these more strongly increase in Germany than in neighboring foreign countries. Yet the citizens and business now require, here and today, a relief. Therefore, away with the CO₂ duty! This decision can be implemented relatively quickly. 

Thus, Herr Chancellor, show that you are open to proposals. You have already in your position on the Near East drawn near to us. Now take care for peace in Europe and go to Russia. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): Those are delusions!

In the purchase of Russian oil and gas can also again lie our competitive advantage. 

I thank you for the attention. 

 

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla, December 17, 2025, German Security and the U.S.A.

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/49, pp. 5757-5759. 

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen. 

Initially I want to remember the dead and wounded of the terror attack in Australia. We stand against this brutalization of and the growing violence against the vulnerable. It makes me speechless with which means throughout the world the struggle of the religions is ever still on the daily order, be it in the Near East, at attacks on German Christmas markets, or now in Sydney where a Jewish community wanted to celebrate the festival of lights. All of these incidents are to be condemned and political consequences need to be drawn, and precisely for that reason we as parliament need decide to speak out against religious fanaticism, extremism and terrorism. It is therefore only fitting when we as the Alternative für Deustschland demand consistently deporting perpetrators without German citizenship to their home countries, since these present a danger for all Germans, with or without a migration background. In that regard, in the various religions there should certainly exist a consensus, and which should enjoin peace. 

It is precisely these negotiations for peace which we since 2022 ever again demand for the Ukraine and Russia. The German governments under Olaf Scholz and Friedrich Merz have allowed themselves a long time for this. In the meantime, the re-elected President of the United States, Donald Trump, seizes the initiative and mediates between the parties to the conflict. The goal needs be ending the senseless death on both sides. I for years have said: The Ukraine will not be able to win this war. 

And what were the political consequences? Herr Merz burdens the German taxpayers with 70 billion euros of debt for weapons deliveries and military assistance to the Ukraine – and here we do not know to this day into which channels it in part trickles away – and with an additional 11.5 billion euros in the next budget. In addition comes the Bürgergeld payments in a sum of 6 billion euros per year to Ukrainians. 

Before which challenges do we now stand? After almost four years of war, hundreds of thousands of soldiers have fallen or been wounded; in addition, comes the civilian victims and a destroyed land. The United States for months have clearly signaled it will withdraw from the circle of supporters of the war. Yet that also means that the billions required for additional weapons purchases, for example in the U.S.A., now need to be paid for by Europe alone – thus, new debts for Germany and precisely that is completely unacceptable. 

I thus insist: It was and is not our war. At the beginning of the destruction was clear that here much money will be required for the reconstruction, that however also much more can be earned. Precisely there has Friedrich Merz been able to gather his best experiences in his mother house, BlackRock. Quite according to the motto: “Good business with other people’s money” [Mit fremdem Geld lässt sich gut wirtschaften], the Chancellor proceeds with his over-reaching plan to illegally expropriate Russian state assets and to give it to the Ukraine. This announcement alone pours additional oil on the fire of this war. Beyond that, the Chancellor promises that Germany self-evidently is readily available for an eventual default of payments. As has been said, Herr Merz: Other people’s money – the money of the Germans – is plainly easier given than one’s own. 

In common with your Union comrades in Brussels, you impose one sanction after another which should be directed against Russia, yet which primarily harm Germany. The energy prices burden the private budgets even so heavily as those of business. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): Do you make a memorial of Putin, who has bombed                                       every week, every day? 

You are responsible for the death of the German economy, and there, Frau Haßelmann, the tears come to me. We in Germany in the year 2025 have lost almost 1,000 industrial workplaces per day; 60 bankruptcies per day. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): Are you already through with the Ukraine?

It affects the automobile industry, its suppliers and thereby the skilled trades and the Mittelstand.  And “gone” means gone. You need be politically responsible for that, yet our children and grandchildren need to solve this dilemma. 

            Vice-president Omid Nouripour: Herr Chrupalla, do you allow an                                             interim question from member Hoffmann? 

No, later please. 

            Vice-president Omid Nouripour: Then continue readily.

And these need already today shoulder the financing of your credits. You make debts so as to be able to cope with the basic expenditures of the social system. The pensioners you fob off in the future with 48 percent of the last years of service. You drive those who create value, after at least 45 years of work, into old age poverty. Yet you want, ja, to bring precisely the pensioners again into an occupation and then call that an active pension [Aktivrente]. Know, Herr Merz, one as Chancellor can scarcely more dismissively deal with these who keep the social state running with their work. 

At the same time you drive forward the de-industrialization, willfully bring us into conflict with Russia and support a corrupt system around the still president Zelenskyi. Your colleagues of the Union delegation emphasize to the press the German Bundestag should be tied up in the use of the frozen Russian assets, and that shows us two things: First, you want to have your perfidious plan provided with a parliamentary majority. And second, we as members should agree to the almost certainly arising contributions of billions to the further support of the Ukraine. That is a deceit scarcely to be surpassed! 

            Steffen Bilger (CDU/CSU): Hä? Why then should the Bundestag occupy itself                                           with it?

You travel today and tomorrow for the EU summit. Should you there make good on precisely these commitments, with your solo you act completely against the interests of the German citizens. And I may therein remind you: In Germany are lacking investment means for the vital infrastrucure, for streets, bridges, railways, schools, hospitals and kindergartens. 

We are all elected by the German people so as to bring forward our country, Germany. Besides, with Victor Orbàn, Andrej Babis and Robert Fico, three EU countries have already indicated the rejection of using the Russian assets, or giving financial guaranties for the Ukraine. So much for your European unity. And those in the Union who still some weeks ago made themselves advocates of the transatlantic relations, now slowly note that there are no more guaranties and no hegemon. The United States’ new security strategy shows us quite clearly: In the center stands the U.S.A. – and only the U.S.A. – and which already has written off the partnership with the old Europe. 

            Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): And therefore your young people make a pilgrimage                                           to America!

Simply nothing is understood of how one can bring balance to the continent and Europe’s interior security with a failed migration policy and lacking a relationship to Russia. 

And once again our Chancellor appears to falsely analyze this announcement. Driven by his old Federal Republic antipathy against the east, he drives forward strategies which let the graves become ever deeper, in foreign lands even so at home. At the CDU party day in Magdeburg, Herr Merz once again showed his quite charming side as he said he had the good fortune to have grown up in the west. And here you once again have misunderstood something: It is we eastern Germans who have given ourselves to the long way of integration in a unified Germany. We do not want to return to the old Federal Republic. 

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): You’ve still not arrived!

In that you give citizens in the east the feeling that, for you, they are of less value, you again prove your incapacity for dealing with people. 

            Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): That is simply just nonsense, what you are telling here!

And therefore, Herr Chancellor, I am happy that you grew up in the west. You would have failed us in the east! 

            Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): Oje, deeper is does not get!

Allow me in conclusion just briefly go into the Chancellor’s announcement to set up a multinational troop for the Ukraine. You thereby show not only that you continue to want to spin the escalation spiral in Europe. You speak of securities for the Ukraine, but mean armament and the construction of new scenarios of intimidation in Europe. 

            Steffen Bilger (CDU/CSU): That is bad for your Russian friends!

For me and us, you however also show that we, with our positioning for peace and against the reinstatement of conscription at the present point in time, stand exactly on the right side. Since this reinstatement indeed later becomes what you here today and also what you yesterday announced, and is in a later future only to be rejected. You said yesterday we would need to respond to a Russian attack. Meanwhile now, not unjustly, the German press also asks: Do you know what you actually said there? Do you actually know what that means, Herr Merz? – We cannot trust you. For you, it is not about the defense of the country. It is to be feared that you with your policy, in view of a loss of tension, initiate or want to initiate deploying conscripts in the Ukraine. 

            Lisa Badum (Greens): You are a problem for the defense of the country!

We do not trust you with our children! 

And in regards the present negotiations with the Ukraine has become very clear that it will be no part of NATO and thereby is excluded a possible alliance. You however attempt with all means to create options for yourself and the Ukraine to prolong the war. To that are we quite clearly opposed. 

The President of the United States had begun the negotiations with Russia as equals [auf Augenhöhe]. Your attempt, Herr Merz, to make clientele policy for Herr Zelenskyi will not be crowned with success. With your kind of policy-making, you were and remain at the children’s table. Herr Chancellor, a state is no international finance concern. Leave therefore the foreign policy to the foreign policy makers, and finally concern yourself over how you may relieve the German economy, the Mittelstand and the skilled trades, in west as in east. For that, you wanted to become Chancellor. Finally trouble yourself for Germany! 

Ladies and gentlemen, I am happy to have left the east-west conflict behind us. With an international troop, you again conjure this up, Herr Merz. You, on that account, are and remain a diehard of the old FRG. You do not consider the future of our country or our children; you as Chancellor are already history. 

            Sara Nanni (Greens): Who actually wrote that for you?

I wish you and your families a peaceful Christmas and hope for a peaceful year in 2026. 

            Steffen Bilger (CDU/CSU): For the Ukraine, too!

Many hearty thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla, October 16, 2025, Merz Government

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/34, pp. 3648-3651. 

Right honorable Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen. 

The last days have shown: A wise Politik contributes to a balance of interests and to a strengthening of the common interest in peace. Herr Chancellor, the strivings for peace in the Gaza war have hopefully brought home to you that it pays to invest in diplomacy and negotiation. Both in Germany and within the European Union is sought to implement the solution of conflicts and wars with sanctions, weapons deliveries and war rhetoric. 

In this regard, I need to tie in the war in the Ukraine. And here also there needs be rapid solutions sufficient for a peace in Europe. Why cannot it also be your duty, Herr Merz, to step forward as a mediator between the Ukraine and Russia? That would be suitable for the office of the German Chancellor. 

And you should finally stop continually formulating new threat situations, even so as colleague Hardt has done yesterday here in his speech, without being able to deliver sufficient evidence for that. 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): Who then has again written that down for you? The Russian                    embassy, or what? You stand for capitulation! 

You are always quite sure that it must have been Russia, Herr Wiese, as in regards Nord Stream. I thereby recall just the drone debate. Friedrich Merz in a talkshow assumed [vermutete] drones in German air space. 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): Help! That is transcribed just so!

Herr Chancellor, to this day you could put forward not a single proof or evidence.  

Putting citizens into a panic, you nevertheless have done. Precisely that, Herr Wiese and Herr Merz, is irresponsible. You polarize, and with your political discourse regress to the time of the Cold War. 

            Steffen Bilger (CDU/CSU): Do you contest the drone over-flights? 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): You want to sell the country to Russia! That is what your                                            party does!

Success worthy of the name for peace and the German people, Herr Chancellor, you clearly do not have on your side. Otherwise, you perhaps might have sat according to protocol in the first row in Egypt. 

The current Federal government behaves with similar carelessness at home. Allow me as lobbyist of the skilled trades to here select one point from the sozial area. This, so it appears, is indeed less controversial, yet is an absolutely more destructive compromise from the government coalition, namely the active pension, as you name it. With the decision to take into consideration only those employees with social insurance mandates, numerous pensioners may not even participate. That is a clear violation of the equal treatment principle. 

I speak of many of thousands of self-employed, as for example the many tradesmen who have worked in individual or small firms, in family businesses. Precisely those who have pursued work with social insurance obligations should continue to pay social duties on the additional income. Since the tradesmen who were and are self-employed shall clearly not be able to earn 2,000 euros tax-free. That is unjust, that is shabby, and before all you divide the pensioners. 

You primarily confirm with these measures one picture: The pensions are plainly not sufficient. On cannot thus live from the pension in the twilight of life. Frau Bas, your request is on that account scarcely sozial or democratic. It is dishonest to again leave the pensioners alone to bear the cost for the political failures of the Federal government. Therefore: Were you to honestly mean it, you would demand of all of us to agree to the abolition of double taxation of old age pensions. 

Ladies and gentlemen, by whom have you in the Federal government actually been advised? Is there no one there who can comprehend the cares and wishes of the old and young? The pensioner should continue to work. The young are thereby allowed to bear still more costs and excessive debts. They also, with the obligatory service, shall be made into the combat-ready weapons while war still reigns in Europe. 

I hope that many citizens today have also heard the speech of Jens Spahn; since he made clear what the conscription for him is primarily about: For sending those obliged to serve against Russia to the front. 

            Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): Ach, rubbish, what you are telling! My                            goodness! 

            Steffen Bilger (CDU/CSU): Of what are you speaking here actually? 

Precisely that, we do not want. That, we will never permit, Herr Hoffmann. 

            Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): You are telling stories, Herr Chrupalla,                            stories!

Beyond that, our children need come to terms with increasing criminality in schools, on the streets. All of that is a situation which you expect of us after 35 years of German unity. You governed for so long, Herr Hoffmann. You are co-responsible for that. 

Valued colleagues of the Greens, you should so slowly make your appearance in your role in  the opposition. When I look at your resolution motion for today’s daily order, I note: You have still not understood the signs of the time. 

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): We require no tutoring from you!

You want to make Europe the world’s first climate-neutral continent, standing there. Apparently you never really re-evaluated the botched government time of the Ampel with Herr Habeck or Frau Baerbock, otherwise it would have come even to you that the German citizens now really have enough of your Politik. Your Green trash was voted out, Frau Haßelmann. 

With your so-called climate neutrality, you really mean de-industrialization and loss of prosperity for the broad population – your consulting firms naturally excepted. To you, the energy security in Germany is all the same, like a concept of who should actually pay for the Green utopia. We too stand for the protection of nature, yet see humanity as a part of that. And for this part, we make Politik. 

Since to whom is it of use when Europe stands there as a climate-neutral yet economically weak continent? Precisely those who then can sell their technologies to us because we no longer have our own industrial and development venues. That is not in the German and also not in the European interest. 

We expect much more of Chancellor Merz, that he stands up for Made in Germany, has concepts developed which let us again become a strong and reliable partner in Europe and worldwide. For that, we require leg room and less regulation, an attractive infrastructure and, before all things, finally advantageous energy prices. 

Those are the priority duties with which the Politik has to concern itself, all of us here in common in the German Bundestag. Behind the interests for Germany and its citizens, all members need to be able to gather. Hide and seek behind the firewall does not belong to that. 

            President Julia Klöckner: Herr member, do you permit an interim question from                                        member Herr Wiese?

Please, Herr Wiese. 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): Herr Chrupalla, many thanks that you permit the interim question.  You said that the Federal government needs to invest in the infrastructure, in the future of this country. Thus I ask you quite openly – I have a further question – : Why have you then rejected the investment in the future of the country, the 500 billion euros which we invest in the infrastructure, in the schools, in the education of the country, so that the next generation finds an intact infrastructure? I have a second question. You have just comprehensively philosophized on what your visions and goals are. Yet I want to say one thing: The success of the German economy in the past years, decades, is in fact based on         that we are embedded in the European Union, in the European internal market. The visions which you in your party program have mean to put the axe to the European unification, means the exit from the European Union. Do you agree with me: “If you do   that, you actually need to rename yourself: AfD is like Arbeitslosigkeit für Deutschland”?  

Herr Wiese, perhaps to begin with a remark on your last sentence. As to the AfD, we will and cannot agree with the SPD on many points – and certainly not with the previous one. And that we are thereby right is certainly also shown in the present election surveys. That is point one. 

            Alexander Hoffmann (CSU/CSU): Do you have an argument for that, Herr                            Chrupalla?

Point two. On the budget. We have put forward an alternative budget – and it certainly distinguishes us – which is plainly not based on debts, which plainly does not force the children and the grandchildren into the debts orgy so as to pay those debts. We want – and this is the distinction for the SPD – that from the regular budget – we have put forward a corresponding budget – precisely those measures which you cited be paid for, and for that not to take up debts of 500 billion euros 

            Alice Weidel (AfD): That certainly does not go to infrastructure; not                                        a cent goes to infrastructure!

and, in part, 850 billion euros until the year 2029. 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): To invest in the future of the country! You want to throttle                        this country! Just say it!

That is unserious. That is before all things not sustainable. On this point, we differ massively. I am not yet done, Herr Wiese. I would gladly answer your second question which pertains to the economic situation. 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): You’ve already said a sentence on that.

Your sanctions policy, before all things, in the last three, four, years has led to that the German economy in this country can scarcely do industry, which, before all things, requires large quantities of energy, like the chemical industry or the steel industry, which emigrate. Have you  actually been cognizant of what all is happening in this country? For that, you principally are responsible with your last Federal government and this Federal government. 

It is thus important that we have good contacts to all European countries. 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): You want to get out of the European Union!                                                That is your goal! Say that for once to the citizens!

Yes, we also need Russian gas because it is advantageous, because with it we would again have a price of 4 or 5 cents per kilowatt-hour for our businesses. 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): We do that, industrial electricity price!

Because energy is so expensive, on that account they emigrate. On that account, they go. 

            Dirk Wiese (SPD): You grind down employee rights! That it is, what you do!

And, for that, you are responsible. 

            President Julia Klöckner: I see the question as answered, and request you                                continue your speech.

Many thanks. I want to go into two points, Herr Merz, which you should thoroughly address at the European Council. I speak of the refusals of the Poles and Italians to deliver the presumed perpetrators who, with the assault on Nord Stream, have attacked our critical infrastructure. Again is thereby brought home to us that the Federal government was exactly so little aware of the seriousness of the situation as it is today; since the willingness for a clarification simply appears not to be at hand. 

Or why do you commit yourself, Herr Merz – also on this not a word from you today – neither at the national nor at the European level to that the investigations of our General Federal Prosecutor be brought forward and the responsible perpetrators be punished with the full harshness of the law? It cannot be, Herr Merz, that supposed friends protect terrorists in Europe. Yes, now come again all the reasons why it is no longer wanted to buy gas from Russia. Yet it is not alone about that in this debate, Herr Spahn. 

            Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): Putin’s party!

It is about the interest of Germany – which has been mislaid by all of you – about the interests of individual citizens, of the Mittelstand and, before all things, of the industry. 

            Jens Spahn (CDU/CSU): You should make a Russia insignia for yourself!

It is these which need pay the price for that through the high costs of energy, even so as for the cost of the inflation. German business invested 4 billion euros in the Nord Stream pipelines so they receive advantageous gas for our industry and the Mittelstand. You have destroyed all of that. 

For the emigration of those creating value, you have to take responsibility, Herr Chancellor. With all understanding that you have taken up a really heavy inheritance for that: You were cognizant and could know that your “autumn of reform”, as you announced it, will not be one. We have not even a mild puff of wind. The Mittelstand, of which here in this country much is always spoken, dies not easily, as I recently needed to read in a newspaper. This Mittelstand dies loud. If you by now still have not heard the shot, then I am really sorry for you. Then you are not the parties which make Politik for Germany. 

And still one sentence on Nord Stream. Here, it is also about namely the fundamentals. Should the presumed actors not be transferred, and you wait that out, you automatically invite an imitation. So far, by failure to implement applicable law were the domestic security and our social system endangered. Yet now here also the legal institutions are hindered. That needs to be solved politically.   

At the European Council, approach your Polish and Italian office partners. I still proceed on the basis that it is in the interest of the Poles and Italians to clarify this assault. 

Many hearty thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Tino Chrupalla, June 24, 2025, Iran, Germany and Honesty

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/12, pp. 978-980. 

Right honorable Frau president. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen. Dear countrymen. 

Once again we have an additional center of conflict. This now extends in the Middle East. And once again we stand as more or less silent observers on the margin, and nevertheless since Sunday are once again in the midst of the parties to the conflict. 

Our narrow knowledge is often confined to one-sided information. Our own news service sources are, as we in this house have heard, directed to friendly organizations. Even these now appear to need be scrutinized. Thus the U.S. American President let it be known that the information of his services in the case of Iran would not correspond to the truth. At the same time, there were reports that the attacked Iran would be apprised of the plans of the U.S.A. 

All of this makes an objective categorization for us all today endlessly difficult. That was clear yesterday morning in the briefing by the chief of the Chancellor’s Office, Herr Frei. In so brief a time frame of events, just a little conclusive information is presented. For the open and informative atmosphere, I want in this place to thank the Chancellor’s Office. 

Yet clearly remains one thing: The possibility especially of a danger of atomic war needs to be excluded. Should the one-time attack by the U.S. Americans have been successful, and potential sources of damage for the security in the Near and Middle East eliminated, this could help prevent the resulting retaliation by Iran of a widespread fire. One reason for additional attacks would thus no longer be present. One question which arises from the past days is of course whether or not any country which has at its disposal such potential abilities should voluntarily submit to international controls. 

In the end, one again comes very quickly to the truly most important categories of politics: Trust and credibility. Besides all matters of interest, these need to be on hand so as to be able to conduct honest negotiations between individual persons, yet also states. In that regard, comes the position of mediators who moderate the speaking process. Here, Qatar for long takes an important role in the region, concerning which I myself in conversations could be convinced. So far, the efforts are certainly not estimated highly enough. It is now for the parties to the conflict to maintain the ceasefire. 

There remains, valued colleagues: Each state has the right to exist, and thus the right to defend itself. The relation here also lies in international law. Like no other, this stands before the challenge to assert itself in the present time. Here and today it is the agreed guideline, and is valid for all. 

All of us here are the representatives of the German population, and stand first of all on their side and on the side of our country. We always place ourselves behind states and their peoples. They decide – like us also – sovereign in elections, over governments and relationships. Yet what we as politicians may and need do when good relations to other states are attended to, is to confront them with the consequences of their actions. It is thus logical and correct to ever again refer to the importance of diplomacy as a guarantee for peace, and ever again remind. 

Beyond that, every advice needs be well weighed and decided here in the German Bundestag. Exactly for that reason, we stand even so on the side of Israel as on the side of all other states with which we share common interests. Anti-semitism has just so little place with us as a blanket valuation of other religions. 

Herr Chancellor, terms like “dirty work” are in the situation completely inappropriate and superfluous, even if they are overtaken from others. Therefore is one thing clear: Double morality brings no one together, but builds evident contradictions, divides and alienates. 

In a particular instance, as always, the future will judge the writing of history. In so far as the so-called Twelve Day War had the potential to contribute positively to a contemporary end point of a long line of conflict, I follow the call of the Chancellor to all participants to therein maintain themselves. 

Which contribution the United Nations, especially the Security Council, can make to this needs  to be discussed – which the Chancellor today did not mention. Along this way are required comprehensive talks, multi-faceted respect and mutual recognition. Discussions of overthrows and regime change in this regard completely lack standing. Ladies and gentlemen, should the Iranian people vote for a change of government, it needs be done from their own power. We are not in the position to determine its future. 

And we need ask ourselves, for example, how well-connected and desired by the people is a crown prince who now appears to almost stand in the starting blocks to have himself perhaps placed, generations after his father, at the head of this country? Do we have an understanding of that or, much more, reliable securities? 

And to call upon our experience: Do we have, as part of the world population in the last decades, really good experiences in strongly intervening from outside in a change of power? What were the consequences of those actions? In that regard, think of Iran, of Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria! Have we really pacified the region and made it safer? Or have we thereby generated trust in us and our actions? 

The core or our alternative policy in the German Bundestag is guided by the basic program of my party: No intervention in the internal affairs of other states. No delivery of weapons to war zones. And the central point is in diplomacy. 

These are our guidelines with which we also want to maintain and primarily advance the domestic security and the economic power of Germany. In that regard, the greatest obstacles are well known to us, one of which is and remains Islamism and the terrorism proceeding from it. This is to be fought by consistent measures in the area of information and prevention, just so as with equipment of security officials and border security, with repatriations, yet naturally also with deportations. And he who does not want to identify himself with the values of our Basic Law can have no place in our society. 

That – I emphasize it ever again – does not stand in contradiction to labor migration, to student residency in Germany, or to the cooperation in cultural-scientific areas. All of these people come because they esteem or want to get to know German Kultur and identity. For the Alternative für Deutschland, it’s about returning to their homeland people who are violence-prone, already convicted of violent acts without a basis to remain, or already refused admittance. Precisely that is only legitimate, and it protects everyone who thinks well of Germany. 

It therefore applies in the present situation to ever again put the question: In which interests occur such events? For the whole and named reasons, it is in our own interest that in the Near and Middle East the weapons finally be silent. We can and want to accept no additional waves of refugees. Any further destruction to infrastructure therefore needs to be avoided. The Federal government needs to commit itself to that. 

Alexander Hoffmann (CDU/CSU): Then speak for once with Putin, Herr Chrupalla! How would it be with that?

We all know that here diverge the interests between state and economic thinking. Reconstruction measures create economic opportunities, yet these would again burden the German taxpayer with special funds, special debts; see Ukraine. 

We are again at the point of credibility. Chancellor Friedrich Merz accuses the SPD of a policy of debts and high taxes, and himself speaks of low energy prices and a strong economy, and again today. Of that, not much has remained. Only, where do we stand today? Friedrich Merz is the Union’s debts Chancellor in red clothes. A new indebtedness of, believe it or not, over 846 billion euros up to 2029 the coalition wants to bring through the Bundestag. The goal should be economic growth. 

Let us take for example 100 billion euros for a comprehensive climate and transformation fund. There is ever still a theme of green hydrogen. Planned was the manufacture of green steel. Only, for whom do we still require these expensive forms of energy production? Besides, we of the AfD have ever again indicated these are fantasies. The German steel industry lies prostrate. When once the furnaces are extinguished, there is no more steel from German production. Therefore, finally take leave of these fantasies! 

And the 5 percent goal of NATO has been agreed, and it is desired to fulfill it. Ladies and gentlemen, one cannot vote for it. We need first for once to know for what the present investments will be used, and against whom do we arm ourselves? On the whole, to where does NATO steer? 

Herr Pistorius may recruit 10,000 additional soldiers. Are then within the Bundeswehr administrative and procurement channels cut back? Do we have sufficient functioning materiel? And before all: Have we sufficient qualified personnel to guarantee the defense of the country? We should all therefore hope that the alliance clause does not enter in. 

Much more important is and presently remains the Strait of Hormuz. It is in our unconditional German interest this commercial passage be kept free without restrictions, especially for raw materials. The oil price has meanwhile already reacted; the previously known highest prices for benzine and diesel are nothing in comparison to what the consumer can then expect. 

On the whole, the large countries of Europe need to come to an understanding of their role. We know nothing of the plans of the U.S.A. We were not drawn in, yet will be continually needed, primarily when the reckoning comes. Europe needs to be perceived as an active negotiations partner and finally clearly articulate its interests. 

Valued colleagues, all wars have one thing in common: They have losers on all sides and need to be avoided. We all for decades live in peace. Let us leave it as is. Let us not become weary of peace, Herr Pistorius, but much more fit for peace. 

Many hearty thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]