SPD: Katja Mast with clear words about asylum policy and the last generation

Interview

The federal and state governments are currently struggling for a fair distribution of refugees – and for financing. The migration summit in the chancellery should bring solutions. municipalities, counties, states; they had all hoped for relief from the federal government.

The agreement: there should be one billion euros more in the costs of refugee care for this year. Special expert groups should negotiate the division by November. The sovereigns are not satisfied with this.

It is not just the issue of refugees that is keeping politicians in suspense. Society is also concerned with the climate crisis and the growing civil disobedience by the last generation – including Katja Mast.

She is the parliamentary manager of the SPD parliamentary group. In an interview with watson, she explains why she finds the form of protest of the last generation bad – and how asylum law must continue to change.

Watson: Ms. Mast, you meant, looking at the actions of the last generation, with “blackmail” climate protection cannot be enforced. The group would stir up anger and divide society. How do you think the activists should continue to demonstrate after their blockade break?

Katja Mast: We also have other groups that focus on climate protection. For example Fridays for Future, who address their concerns very efficiently. The last generation makes many people angry. I don’t think this form of protest is very helpful.

Are politicians even listening?

Of course we listen. But if we are expected to do exactly what activists say: no. I was elected to advance the whole country and not individual interests, i.e. to weigh things up.

For over a year, the last generation has been regularly blocking traffic.Image: dpa / Paul tines

But?

We want ambitious climate protection. We turn that into concrete politics. There is a big difference between demanding things and doing things and looking people in the face and taking them with you.

What do you mean?

For example the coal compromise. We were very successful in bringing the various stakeholders around the table and showing how we deal with challenges. I’m asking for trust. In the end, it’s not just about ambitious climate protection.

Rather?

It is also about considering economic strength and social balance. There is a lot of support for climate protection in the population – that’s why I don’t understand, for example, why the CDU is currently one signature campaign goes against climate protection. It’s about keeping the country together.

And how do you intend to do that?

By explaining and listening a lot, such as with the Building Energy Act. If we want to be carbon neutral by 2045, we need to act now. And we have to think: how do we get socially balanced support. And in such a way that even those who have the least can afford modern heating. We are now discussing this in Parliament.

As you say: Europe wants to become climate neutral by 2045. What accompanies the climate crisis is a global migration movement. The Advisory Council on Integration and Migration proposes a climate pass and the climate card. Is that a reasonable way to deal with the challenge?

The dangers of climate change are enormous. Our answer is: We want to combat the causes of flight so that as few people as possible have to leave their homes. That is why we also support many climate protection projects all over the world, especially in the Global South. At the same time, we need to manage migration even better. With the draft for Skilled Immigration Act and the opportunity card, we have also opened up routes to Germany.

The asylum policy of the traffic light is currently causing irritation. Jessica Rosenthal even called this policy unworthy of an SPD-led government. Where does the sudden hard course in dealing with refugees come from?

The proposals come from all coalition partners – Annalena Baerbock supports them as foreign minister as well as Nancy Faeser as interior minister. It’s about the fact that the identity of people is registered directly at the EU’s external border and it is therefore clear: who is entering Europe and who is not? At the same time, we create many ways of legal migration to Germany. Because we have a great need for committed people who want to work and live here. That would never have been possible with the CDU.

In what way?

Together with Europe, we want to preserve the fundamental right to asylum and allow new, orderly paths of migration. We also have to create acceptance among the population for this, and without any resentment.

What do you mean without resentment?

That society must not be divided into “They” and “We”. Racism and xenophobia must not have a chance.

So different from the guest workers in the 50s?

Back then we forgot that we were bringing in people and not just workers. This must not happen to us again. Integration is important – not only of those who have an employment contract, but also of their families. In care, in crafts – we need heads and hands everywhere. And with our demographic development, we cannot do without immigration.

This means that the 180-degree turnaround in asylum policy aims to ensure that fewer illegal migrants come to Germany, while on the other hand more legal migration takes place through the laws. But some people don’t have time to submit applications first – they have to leave their country and go.

But then they have a clear right to asylum. We have seen from the example of the Ukraine that we are able to act in special situations. Humanity is absolutely central. At the same time, we are also working on migration agreements. In doing so, we want to enable more legal immigration routes – but also to return those people whose asylum application has been rejected to their home country more quickly. This is a requirement of fairness.

Critics fear that the EU plans will curtail the right to asylum.

First we have to look at what the law really looks like in the end. As a long-time parliamentarian, I can say that things are decided in the process. We will find ways to ensure that people who have a right to asylum can continue to exercise that right.

In the coalition agreement, the traffic light had stated that it was saying goodbye to anchor centers – but the EU and Germany are planning exactly that with the facilities at the borders. Angela Merkel said in 2015 that closed borders should not prevent anyone from fleeing – how should anchor centers do that create?

They use the term anchor center all the time, not me.

What would you call that?

It’s not about the name. It is about the fact that those who are really entitled to protection and have a reason for asylum are subject to a constitutional procedure and are quickly recognized. On the other hand, it must be clarified quickly where there is no chance.

Okay.

We are very involved in development policy. It is always better to tackle the root causes of flight than to send people down difficult routes where they have to expose themselves to smugglers. This is a humanitarian drama. We cannot look at these processes in isolation, they all come together.

At the beginning of our conversation, we talked about ambitious climate protection. In the end, it not only protects us from heat and heavy rain events. It protects the whole earth – and also combats the causes of flight.