http://www.guido-westerwelle.de/Reden/909c85i35/index.html
to download: Rede_Westerwelle_G8-Gipfel_02.07.09.pdf (25.74 KB)
Speech by Dr. Guido Westerwelle
the government declaration of the Chancellor to
G-8 world economic summit of 8 to 10 July 2009
speech in the Bundestag on 2 July 2009
(Official Report)
Mr. President, Ladies and gentlemen!
Chancellor, you have in your policy statement each item on the agenda, which is due to the G-8 summit in L'Aquila, said something. This should be so. It is exciting but what is said, and before all, why nothing is said. Madam Chancellor, you spoke about the need - that is a central concern of German politics - the bank oversight, say, the financial market supervision, more needs to be regulated. We are indeed in this House will agree that it needs appropriate international rules, particularly for finance and financial flows. But who calls for greater international financial markets and banking supervision, it must first national - for us - possible through Germany.
(Applause from the FDP and the Left Party)
now is that I do not know What number policy statement, which has made the Federal Government since the outbreak of the economic and financial crisis on the subject. In her statement of 7 , 2008, in the autumn of last year, have you, Chancellor, called for a reform for the national banking supervision and announced. To date, it will not manage. To this day it remains in the fragmentation of national banking supervisors in the Ministry of Finance, BaFin and the Bundesbank. Exciting in such policy statements, is what you are saying nothing because you can not agree more in your government. National supervisors must be regulated. She is one of the reasons for the Failure of control mechanisms, which led to the crisis. Who wants to perform with international authority, must first make his own homework. You have not done ladies and gentlemen of the Federal Government.
(Applause from the FDP) is
For months it always and repeatedly called on you, but nothing happened.
Take the next area. Of course it is true that you, Chancellor, to emphasize in your policy statement for the Federal Government the need for a sound climate policy. It is also true - we welcome this - that you named the 2-degree target in this policy statement again. About which They did not turn spoken, is that about which you can speak no more, because you are about that in this government are not in agreement, namely how to achieve a better climate policy and what are the tools that you offer international and you negotiate want. Of course we want to rely on more renewable energy - no question - but we need also a very energy mix. The instruments of a better climate policy are especially in the intelligent energy policy.
(applause of the ABG. Gudrun Kopp (FDP))
to energy policy, you say in this policy statement nothing, absolutely nothing, because you do not agree. That is why we say here: You must create clarity in your government. What do you think of nuclear energy? All the other G8 countries share in the interest of climate protection and the safe nuclear technology.
(Fritz Kuhn (Alliance 90/The Greens): That's true but it does not!)
What say you, ladies and gentlemen of the federal government on this?
(Applause from the FDP - Thomas Oppermann (SPD): No, we say)
We need this bridging technology. It is today again become obvious that you do not agree. We say this: What does it make sense that we in Germany from the most modern and safest nuclear technology that the world indicates
(laughter at Alliance 90/The Greens) get
to shop the day after the electricity from power plants, much less secure from abroad? Energy mix is the best response to climate change.
(Applause from the FDP - Thomas Oppermann (SPD): Very good topic)
way it's very interesting, as will also respond to them. This proves my theory that you can not find the truth in your government to unity. This one has just been noticed in this house in the reaction. On this day you have been opposed to your own environment minister in the Climate Policy resistance.
Chancellor, you said something about disarmament. You have the Trip to Washington, used to good and successful interviews what we pleased. But who says something to the disarmament policy, but then such as the initiative of President Obama in Prague completely leaves out in his policy statement, which again shows that there is little consensus in the government's fundamental international concern in Germany.
The question is: What do you do now to support the vision of a nuclear-weapon-free world of President Obama? Is that a vision of the federal government? What do you say to the conventional and nuclear disarmament? I would like the Chancellor, when she talks to the meeting heard that Obama is not only visited, but it when it comes to peace and disarmament, also strongly supported. That would have you, Chancellor, have to say in your policy statement.
(Applause from the FDP)
What will you do at the national level, such as those concerning the nuclear warheads, the store still in Germany? Will this be a German contribution to disarmament and peace initiatives in the world? If you enter into discussions with the allies to the last remaining nuclear warheads that we have in Germany as relics of the Cold War to withdraw? Too, there is no common view in the government, and that's why this here is nothing said.
you have said something to the Africa policy. In general you can not agree more. They also have said something to development aid. In general one can agree with you on the whole only. But concrete also help does not come. Why not? Because you are in the coalition government in turn, have no agreement. Simply saying, give Germany an international comparison of the second-most money for development aid is not enough. It's not just about how much money you spend on development assistance, but also about where and with whom it ends up, whether it results in better policy, whether it is in fact a humanitarian assistance. That we take for example the G-8 Summit and let us give German G-20 countries, so developing countries that sit with us at G-20 meeting at the table, development aid, is not a sound development policy.
(Applause from the FDP)
Finally and finally, when you are talking about the economic and financial crisis and in this House about deals, which will be discussed at the G-8 summit in L'Aquila, then it would also necessary to say something to contribute to national economic and financial policy. This is nothing was said. We believe that some stimulus packages that you have adopted, which often miss the target and waste more tax money as a creation of jobs are mean enough. They are also a government statement enough. Accordingly, there remains the question of what we will do structurally. Hillary Clinton has characterized as Foreign Minister a remarkable phrase: Never miss a good crisis. So, never miss the opportunities the crisis. - A crisis is always bad. The only good thing about this crisis is that we have the problem of pressure to force at least would have to now implement the structural changes that we believe in truth for many years that they need to be addressed. This is the real point you omit entirely.
arguing for weeks, the Republic of what the German tax system is. There is an apparent conflict between the government parties and the Federal Government. Nothing is said about this. What are you going to those with which you now sit at the negotiating table, saying the desire of citizens to discharge the tax levies? What answer will you give them? Will be said at the one table, the Chancellor of the participants of the G-8 meeting, "We want the tax structure reform, this is our offer to the international community to stabilize the world economy", saying at the other table of the Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs, the exact opposite? This government was also in this line is not present. The policy statements will in fact generally about the problems away because you are in the concrete no longer agree.
We as FDP remain convinced that a fair tax system is not the reward of a recovery, but the precondition for growth, growth drivers, better economy and thus is the way, for better and healthy public finances. This is the real context, it should be talked about.
(Applause from the FDP)
Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, we do not accept that, although we are now in the OECD comparison, an exceptionally high burden in the form of taxes and charges on labor income, namely the smaller and average earnings in Germany have to raise this issue is ignored. You have rightly pointed out that since you are now almost four years of the Federal Chancellor. It is - at least planned - last policy statement, which you have held in this legislative session in the House.
(Volker Kauder (CDU / CSU): Wait!)
- Mr Kauder, I said explicitly in this term.
(Thomas Oppermann (SPD): What do you want to say it)
- What I want you to say is quite obvious, Mr Oppenheimer.
(Applause from the FDP - Renate Kuenast (Alliance 90/The Greens): Yes)
Since you ask it, I can somewhat clearer formulate:
(Volker Kauder (CDU / CSU): Please!)
Ladies and gentlemen of the SPD, you have now shown for eleven years at Treasury responsibility. They have shown that you can not. It is good that you will recover soon in the opposition.
(laughter from members of the SPD - Thomas Oppermann (SPD):? Is that all you have put forward this, you will not be selected)
for each rule that you complain in fiscal policy, you have the Ministry of Finance, you in a socially democratic in the last eleven years have to adhere. For all that is missing, you have to complain to himself.
(Applause from the FDP)
All that's missing, have to answer for you politically.
I would like to draw inferences about what is really necessary and what is in our view. They have taken four years in the so-called grand coalition government. We realize that you are responsible for the largest tax increase, which have taken place in the history of the Federal Republic of Germany ever. We note: Never before has a government been so much debt as your government, in bad days, but in a good day.
say that one should not live in Germany on the conditions. But they were the leaders of a policy that led to added that Germany is living beyond his means. You said you want to invest, you want to reform, rehabilitate you want. From this government remains perhaps the scrapping. Otherwise not have happened. State finances are ruined. The taxes are high. They have not fulfilled your duties in those years. It is time that we get a government that thinks along the same direction and are not paralyzed because they are on most issues can no longer certain.
Thank you very much for your attention.
(Applause from the FDP)
0 comments:
Post a Comment