When two people like each other, third parties have a problem. In the traffic light, it is the Greens who have now found themselves in the role. The next coalition committee will take place this Wednesday evening, a good three weeks after the three-day long-distance version, now a follow-up meeting. They want to come to an understanding again on old and new conflict issues, it is said.
It was a good thing for Christian Lindner that he had an appearance at the SPD economic forum on Tuesday. The “entrepreneurial professional association on the side of the social democracy” (self-description) is ideologically more compatible with the FDP than with the Greens. Not quite homeland for the Minister of Finance, but attractive enough to document the current closer proximity to the SPD in the new coalition talks in this way.
Lindner made it philosophical. Historically speaking, social democrats and liberals have one important thing in common, despite all their differences: they are materialists. Or in Lindner’s words: “Social democrats and liberals are clear that a society has a material basis.” They were not so concerned with “supernatural issues or the afterlife”.
The economy does not want subsidies, but the green light.
Christian Lindner, FDP boss
Of course, Lindner is not completely unfamiliar with preaching. He is not so close to social democracy that he would have omitted the clearly more market-oriented derivation of the material bases in his FDP in the declaration of friendship, which should also have an effect on third parties. Nothing works without growth, according to his credo, because a “stagnant society” cannot improve its material situation.
More freedom, more openness
But what hinders growth? When there is a shortage of workers and too little investment, he has the traffic light partners behind him. Investments through higher national debt? Since the FDP claims the exclusive no. Just like when it comes to promoting the economy, it claims the attitude that is friendly called “laisser faire”, but also “Manchester capitalism” in the SPD and the Greens.
“Business doesn’t want any subsidies,” Lindner knows, “but the green light to be able to implement their projects.” In other words, less bureaucracy, fewer government regulations and obstacles. “The green light costs nothing,” the finance minister points out. One can almost feel how pleased he is to present this mnemonic in the coalition committee. Especially because of the Greens.
So more freedom. Hence openness to technology. Lindner is certain that it is right not to ban the combustion engine “prematurely”. Transformation – good too, but not in a way that companies can’t keep up. An integrated capital market in the EU, liberating the supply of credit in global competition.
And Lindner also praises securitisations, i.e. the financial vehicle that triggered the financial crisis in 2008, because this is how toxic US real estate loans found their way around the world in a piggyback process. An “actually useful instrument”, says Lindner, who would like to see it used more and less regulated.
By the way, there is enough money, he doesn’t fear the competition from the American government’s “Inflation Reduction Act”. The 369 billion euros planned there are less than what is planned in the EU for climate protection support in the coming years. In the case of the Greens, on the other hand, the US project is a role model and a reason to demand more money for the said purpose.
Lindner left it to his budget secretary, Werner Gatzer, to explain in the SPD economic forum how much money is actually available: In the climate and transformation fund of the federal government, only 48 percent of the planned funds were used last year, says the top official. So a lot of money remains unused and is basically waiting for next year. The reason? Lack of green light, Lindner would have said. The state secretary put it this way: Funding purposes are found quickly, but working out the funding guidelines just takes time.
