Frank Magnitz, November 27, 2020, Inner Cities, Commerical Rent

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/196, pp. 24787-24789. 

Herr President. Ladies and gentlemen.

If one wishes to see the best Germany of all time, then a momentary glance at the German inner cities suffices. Vanishing attraction, increasing decay and often also a latent sense of insecurity, that is meanwhile what our inner cities are coming to. This situation is not new. As a result of the competition of giant retail centers in the greenbelt areas and the increasing on-line business, they in past years lose both customers and purchasing power.

Edkhard Pols (CDU/CSU): Yet your colleague Hemmelgarn is building.                    He promotes that!

In precisely this situation, internet concerns, with the friendly support of the cartel parties, achieve ever more importance, while the neighborhood stores go to the dogs. And the friendly saleslady at the bookstore may soon be pushing pallets to and fro at Amazon.

The Federal government thus promotes unfair competition at the cost of the small businessman and the Mittelstander. In that regard, it does not help to conjure up the so-called transformative power of the cities. In the present time, the inner cities have three foundations: An urban, a national and an international. The urban foundation I have just described; our motion “Inner City as Home Space” [Drucksache 19/24658] is concerned with it. It includes measures to enhance their attraction. Retailing must again become a tangible event. In areas of a Federal promotion program, it concerns a balanced mix of commercial and private usage, including dwellings, unhindered accessibility and adequate free parking possibilities, a greater variety of business offerings, and the coordination of city planning between neighboring cities and communities.

Violent perpetrators, trivialized as part of the Event and Party Scene, are meanwhile in many places the new masters of the inner cities. They oppress residents, visitors and business managers. Our motion therefore values security and cleanliness in the inner cities.  

The national foundation is surrendering to the Corona hype. As of yesterday, the wearing of a mask is obligatory in publicly frequented places, and there must be 10 or 20 square meters per customer in the respective stores. At the same time, citizens move about, for example, in the closest spaces on buses and trains. It is exactly these crying contradictions which make clear the nonsense of the Corona preventative measures. And I say to you: An end to that!

With a mask and distance duty, the inner cities are neither a space in which to linger nor for living and well-being, and are certainly no home space.

Yet it is not the virus which destroys our inner cities. It is the utterly disproportionate measures of the Corona cabinet. A glance at Sweden shows how it goes: No pressure, no denunciation, no police state; instead, a relaxed atmosphere, mutual trust, prospering inner cities.

            Eckhard Pols (CDU/CSU): That is just rubbish!

As can be seen, it can be just so simple. Why then the excessive measures in Germany? On that, the Chancellor expressed herself in February of this year in Davos. Cite:

This transformation basically means in the next 30 years leaving the entire way of business and life to which we have been accustomed in the industrial era… 

 

He who holds this politics to be brainless, errs. It has been planned and will be, against all opposition, enforced, in the meantime with water cannons and violence-ready police, and by the illegal arrest of citizens of no ill repute, among whom was even a member of our delegation. 

Just why does the Federal government stoke uncertainty and panic?

            Christoph Hoffmann (FDP): Why must you always provoke?

Listen calmly.

            Christoph Hoffmann (FDP): You have still provoked!

Even the Chancellor, her cabinet and the State Minister-presidents must recognize what their actions produce: Fundamental intrusions into the basic rights and freedom of the citizens, destruction of our economic and mental fundamentals of life, hatred and agitation against those who think otherwise and ultimately a complete surveillance of the people. Does the RKI [Robert Koch Institute] become something like a Stasi central?

That’s nice, you’ve noticed. 

           Christoph Hoffmann (FDP): The last gasp!

Eckhard Pols (CDU/CSU): We are here discussing commercial rent and                                    inner cities. So, Herr Magnitz: Lack of topic number six!

The international foundation is the big new start. If it is to succeed, then quite obviously must be abolished trusted values like family, nation, cash and private property. The Great Reset is a real, existing theory. Herr Schwab’s book of the same name from the World Economic Forum is already on the market. It is about more than the inner cities; it is about our entire country.

            Vice-president Petra Pau: Please come to a conclusion.

I come to a conclusion. The AfD is the voice of reason in the heart of democracy. I implore the people out there: Do not be afraid [Lassen Sie sich keine Angst machen]. Defend yourselves and go into the streets!

           Kai Wegner (Greens): Inconceivable!

           Eckhard Pols (CDU/CSU): Aua, aua, aua! That is a real pain!

Franziska Brantner (Greens): To designate the RKI as a Stasi central, what is                                that for forgetting history!

Jürgens Martens (FDP): I would rather explain that as owing to a massive                                    dose of psycho-pharmaceuticals!

Franziska Brantner (Greens): The question is, what did he take?

Jürgens Martens (FDP): Something Russian?

Franziska Brantner (Greens): Nay, he needs to take nothing! Without it,                                    that is already so harmful!

 

 [trans: tem]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tino Chrupalla, November 26, 2020, Pandemic

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/195, pp. 24580-24582.

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

Much has happened in the last days. All of these events raise questions which revolve about me as a politician, businessman, father and citizen and do not allow me to sleep peacefully. Right honorable Frau Chancellor, I am perplexed by the extension of the preventative measures. You thereby proverbially shut down Germany. And please, it is clear to us that the endangered groups must be protected; we have here demanded that often enough.

            Claudia Roth (Greens-Augsburg): What?

            Britta Haßelmann (Greens): You have not done that! Many of you still                                     deny Corona!

Yet what value to you is the life’s work of those who depend on your decisions? Where is your respect for the dignity of men, for our Basic Law?

            Anton Hofreiter (Greens): You do not at all know what the dignity of men is!

Economically and mentally, this Federal government leaves behind a field of rubble.

Now, Frau Dr. Merkel, have you really thought through this entire process to the end? That actually corresponds to your credo. Why will not critical voices also be included for you in the determination of decisions? How scientific are these proceedings?

As an opposition party, we of the AfD strive for reasonable and proportionate solutions. With all means, you defame us at every stage; Herr Mützenich has again here given the best example of that. We are elected members. We represent the portion of the population which has given us their votes. As a member of the largest opposition party in the German Bundestag, I can only say: That is over 12 percent or 6 million of the voters. With your proceedings, you defame not only the AfD, you separate our voters from society and, despite that, offer them no persuasive concepts.

We all, dear colleagues, are here as politicians to form the general social conditions. We should thereby include the broad social discourse. But you, Frau Chancellor, decide only between black and white, and in that you believe yourself always to be right. You and your Federal government set yourselves apart from parliamentary democracy.

             Saskia Esken (SPD): [****]

The members of this sovereign house first learned in the press on Tuesday midday of which preventative measures the Minister-presidents had agreed on. It appeared, as if in a film scenario, that these on the following day were merely passed through with a wink.

Apropos a film scenario, Herr Finance Minister…Who pays the ever new bills for the purchased assistance? It is again – I can say it to you – the worker, the Mittlestand, and the small handworker – today, tomorrow and in the future. It is to me really inexplicable how a Social Democrat can be so unsozial towards the workers. One thing is certain: Europe, which you hold so dear, you thereby permanently damage.

Herr Linnemann, as chairman of the CDU’s Mittlestand association, you have in the last years correctly shown: The Mittlestand requires planning security. How do you explain the decisions of your party to the merchants, the firms and the trades? Does the social market economy still at all play a role in your thought and action?

In regards the setting aside of the insolvency obligation until March 31, 2021, there are meanwhile said to be over 800,00 businesses which in some way will be artificially kept alive. How do you plan to forestall that, Herr Economy Minister?...Herr Altmaier, a successful business requires capital, customers, sales and courage. How do you actually want to motivate old and new firms to persevere? For me as a businessman, motivation is the driving force. On your guarantees, to the contrary, – you have shown that – should one who is self-employed not rely.  

Worthy cabinet members, for you, who or what is actually system-relevant? And with what means do you support these people; for example, the skilled medical personnel who work for years and today, completely under-staffed, shall guarantee the implementation of your disproportionate preventative measures?

Herr Brinkhaus, you have today x-times said thanks. The people are full to the limit with “thanks”. My proposal: Finally fashion a relief whereby the system-relevant personnel in all branches shall be immediately freed of the wage tax [Lohnsteuer]. I guarantee you: These people do not hold on to the money. They do not take it to a tax haven. They will immediately again expend it in our own country. For they need it to finance their living expenses and to support their families. With such measures, you would demonstrate a true bond with the people.

Frau Chancellor, one thing I must grant you: You appear to enforce your will without conditions.

             Katrin Göring-Eckardt (Greens): That would be nice!

Yet your actions have produced insecurity and angst among the people of our country. Corona  has not put this country into a deep depression; that was you, Frau Chancellor, you with your policy which you regard as being without alternative.

             Michael Grosse-Bömer (CDU/CSU): And still the refugees!

             Claudia Roth (Greens-Augsburg): Exactly! Still the refugees!

Yet what does that actually have to do with the welfare of the German people? Is that not simply a dubious attempt to maintain one’s own power? And will you actually be right to claim to lead this country? You really should ask yourself that.

Many thanks.

 

[trans: tem]

           

 

Alice Weidel, November 26, 2020, Pandemic

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/195, pp. 24569-24571.

Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

The collateral damages of your Corona policy are now already greater than the damages caused by the virus itself. The greatest damages you have inflicted on our economy, our Mittelstand and our legal and constitutional order by means of the third – so-called – population defense law. In record-breaking haste, you have permitted yourself to write out a blank check for a fundamental and incisive infringement of basic rights.

            Christian Lindner (FDP): We had discussed that last week!

In opposition to that last week the people held a demonstration, which you rubbed out with water cannons and violence – a low point for the democratic composition of our state.

            Ralph Brinkhaus (CDU/CSU): Certainly the law-breaking has been                                        brought here by you!

Emergency measures must clarify, be able to be examined, and follow strictly limited criteria, and be subjected to close, parliamentary control. You however have simply written your dubious measures into a law which thereby enables you to continue as before, unannoyed by the courts. The parliament from now on is an on-looker.

Thus again, unforeseen by the constitution, a round of wheeling and dealing from the Chancellor’s office and the Minister-presidents has met in the virtual backrooms and this round has again negotiated decisions which encroach deeply upon the lives and rights of citizens and businesses. What you demand of the citizens is inconsistent, contradictory, of dubious utility, and is saturated with an undemocratic spirit of a state-authoritarian patronization.  

It is simply no concern of the state when and whom one meets in his private quarters and with whom and in which surroundings someone celebrates Christmas with family, neighbors or close friends. That is improper, that is intrusive.

Do you really not understand how condescending and insulting it is for grown, mature citizens when the state plays the nanny and itself presumes to graciously allot what shall still be allowed during the holidays and what shall be forbidden? The state’s meddling in private affairs and family life poisons the social climate and promotes phenomena like spying and denunciation, such as at the beginning of the week in Söderland Bavaria when the police, on a tip, stormed into a little coffee klatsch of pensioners. Quite honestly, our police officers have better things to do.

To no reasonable people can be explained the chaos into which you throw schools and educational institutions, even though the danger of infection emanating from them is only slight. Instead of learning, children must grapple with questionable mask duties and freeze in continually aired-out classrooms. At any time during these unplanned hagglings over the extension of the school holidays have the parents been thought of, who besides often certainly have no additional vacation days so as to care for their children? Who shall understand that it shall be in order to go to work in full buses and subways, yet it shall be an unbearable risk to eat in restaurants with tables far distanced from one another?

What is that for a breach of trust as concerns restaurateurs, retailers, the self-employed, and the small businessmen who for long grind their teeth and endure? Many in good faith have invested not a little so as to implement the hygiene concepts only to again find themselves in a lockdown. This lockdown will finish off many and destroy their livelihoods and leave the retailers in the desolated inner cities to starve in an extended poverty. The government thus punishes precisely those who have done everything correctly. Not once in the numbers given out by the RKI [Robert Koch Institute] is there evidence that the closing of restaurants might have a noteworthy influence on the incidences of infection.

Lockdowns without end strengthen the state sector and in the long-term destroy the Mittelstand and the variety of self-employed businessmen and freelancers on whom is based the strength of our market economy. It therefore directly depends on the citizens’ self-responsibility if we wish to find a way to deal with this situation. Long-term meddling by the state is really no solution. Do not underestimate the citizens, and do not overestimate yourselves.

The state must concentrate itself on its core duties, support and invest in the performance ability of the healthcare system, construct capacities where required, and secure the functionality. Beyond that – as I already in March indicated – it must find preventative measures for the protection of especially endangered groups of the population and medical personnel. Timely prevention would have been the right way.

The overcoming of the crisis requires a calm, believable information policy and must be based on clear, comprehensible criteria. To this day, you do not obtain that. We however before all need an open, honest and unincited dialogue over what is to be done and in fact before, and not after, the decisions are taken, as we are doing here today.

            Ansgar Heveling (CDU/CSU): You yourself must laugh at that!

It is quite clear to me that that hits you.

             Britta Haßelmann (Greens): That does not hit us!

In this debate must be everything essential [sachliche] and

             Anton Hofreiter (Greens): You do not at all know what the word                                            “essential” means!

and not only that which has been acceptable to the Chancellor and some of the Minister-presidents. We may thus turn back to democratic normality.

             Anton Hofreiter (Greens): You also do not know what democratic is!

 Many thanks.

 

 

[trans: tem]