Berlin Abgeordnetenhaus, Plenarprotokoll
18/81, pp. 9470-9472.
Right honorable Herr President. Right honorable ladies and
gentlemen.
We are today debating a sum of two billion euros – two
billion euros which the State of Berlin shall pay for the electricity grid [Stromnetz]. This large scale alone
self-evidently justifies the current affairs hour here today.
The Stromnetz Berlin GmbH for 130 years manages the electricity
grid in Berlin with electrical lines laid mostly underground, transformer
stations, and de-centralized energy generation. It is their duty to secure the
electricity supply of all Berliners, of the businesses of Berlin, as well as of
the public lighting, and it is responsible for the maintenance and renewal of
the technical investment. These duties have been reliably carried out by the Stromnetz
Berlin GmbH as a Vattenfall subsidiary to the present day.
The coalition now wants to socialize [verstaatlichen] this functioning, private enterprise for the reason
that the electricity grid serves the public interest [Daseinsvorsorge], similar to the Berlin water works [Wasserbetriebe]. Colleague Stroedter has
just referred to the Berlin water works; they will be gladly included as a
chief witness of how a successful socialization can ensue.
Nevertheless, the comparison limps if one knows the history
of the Berlin water works; thereto a brief digression: In 1999, under the SPD
finance senator Fugmann-Heesing, the Berlin water works were partially
privatized. Why? – The 1.7 billion euros in revenues at that time should serve
to restore the Berlin State budget. Nevertheless, a result of the deal were
secret pacts contractually guaranteeing returns of eight percent for private
investors RWE and Veolia and increasing water prices of more than 30 percent at
the cost of the Berliners, which would have come out even higher if money from
the State budget had not been supplied.
Berlin citizens of the Berliner Wassertisch are to be
thanked that this unspeakable, politically motivated, partial privatization had
again been rescinded a few years later. If you now assert that the re-communization
of the Berlin water works had been a complete success and a good comparative
example for the purchase of the Berliner Stromnetz, then I say to you: The re-communization
of the water works was merely a correction of the SPD’s fatally political, false
decision and therefore in no way works as a comparative example for the
socialization of the Berliner Stromnetz. The pros and cons in regards these
large-scale businesses should be precisely weighed. That public interest
undertakings should be in the hands of the State is thoroughly comprehensible. Since
in the past sums in the millions in contested concession proceedings concerning
the Berliner Stromnetz have been expended, it is in fact worthy of welcome that
these legal arguments now find an end. That, to be sure, a successfully
working, private business which acts in a strongly regulated market sector, can
be better led by the State of Berlin – of that we have considerable doubt.
The State of Berlin as a businessman has surely not covered
itself in glory. There are altogether for examples: The BER, an insufficient
new housing construction, rotting bridges and streets, a gigantic backlog in
public building restoration, disfunctional municipal offices, and further so. If
Berliners were to rely on the promises of the politics, then they would be
forsaken. How else is to be explained that, since the beginning of the
legislature, no time period can be offered for the simplest, self-evident
duties? Ultimately, this is a management proposition which any member of the Mittelstand, any small business owner can
solve without a problem; only the Berlin State government under red-red-green
since 2016 develops no solution.
Back to the electricity grid and the question of financing: As
we have heard, purchasing outside of the core budget should be financed. That
means that the entire purchase price is financed by a State holding and
investment company [Beteilungsgesellschaft].
Credit costs are now so favorable as never and will be
gladly used as an argument to sweet talk oneself into the purchase of the
silverware. Yet we now also know that the electricity gird shall remain
long-term in State hands. Do the credit interest rates also remain long-term so
low? – Probably not. And if now long-term credit terms are concluded, we merely
shift the budget risks into the future; we however do not abolish them.
Here arises the question of the current maintenance of the
electricity grid. The State of Berlin is, ja,
almost famous for gladly letting its State real property decay; several police
and fire stations, school building, etc. – a song can be sung. The Stromnetz
GmbH has in past years regularly invested three-figure sums in the millions for
the restoration and construction of the grid. Whether the State of Berlin as
owner also does this is the big question.
And how does the parliamentary control appear? – It is
certainly promised to us and the Stromnetz GmbH will be a member of our
investments committee. Yet everyone knows how difficult access to documentation
will be made for us as parliamentarians when it is really critical, or how
often supporting material is simply not placed at disposal or in places
blacked-out. Authentic control appears differently.
The IBB, our State promotional bank, will play an important
role in the financing. Yet that also means that the State of Berlin needs to
ultimately assume securities which which in case of a crisis also need to be
serviced. The liability risks thereby fall completely upon the taxpayer and
naturally back on the core budget. Which liability risks can arise we may see
in the instance of the BER which required three-figure sums in the millions so
as not to need declare insolvency. Presently, we may see even so real liability
risks in regards the Messe Berlin, in regards the Berliner Bäder-Betrieben, in
regards all State-owned business which as a result of the lockdown preventive
measures needed and need to bear considerable business losses.
In view of the State of Berlin’s highest indebtedness, we
urgently plead, in direct regard of the future, to not enter into yet more
budget risks which are in no way necessary. First perform actual budget duties
and concern yourself so that an administration functions, before you socialize
functioning, private undertakings.
Let us come to the politically subsumed goal of the
coalition, which is to drive forward the energy transition. If one looks at the
homepage of the Berliner Stromnetz GmbH, one can recognize that this already
has now taken into its distribution network wind power investments, solar investments,
and block heating power plants. One can also read that especially wind power and
solar investments lead to particular challenges, since as is known, they do not
constantly generate electricity. Yet the most important duty of the Stromnetz
is to offer to all Berliners a secure electricity supply and to care for an
equal network coverage. Precisely here we see the danger that this network
coverage can no longer in the future be guaranteed. Here unfortunately help no
green Utopias that can store the energy of an electricity grid. Political will
plainly does not replace physical laws of nature.
In conclusion, let it be said: We hold the socialization of
a private business functioning for 150 years to be false. We see in the coming
decades considerable budget risks for the Berlin taxpayers and we fear that a
stable electricity grid coverage can no longer be guaranteed in the future by
means of political decisions.
We do not need more state, we need more entrepreneurship,
more social market economy and more freedom!
Many thanks.
[trans: tem]
