SEven before he was elected Chancellor, Olaf Scholz had announced at the end of November that the decision on general vaccination against the corona virus would be left to the Bundestag, across the group boundaries. This announcement finally led to a so-called orientation debate in Parliament on the highly complex topic on Wednesday. Those who support this approach were happy to announce it in advance as a “great hour of parliamentarism”. The parliamentarians had taken three hours. “People expect orientation from us,” said Bundestag President Bärbel Bas (SPD).
But what initially followed was a great moment of party bickering. SPD MP Dagmar Schmidt made the start. She is one of those in the traffic light coalition who advocated compulsory vaccination from the age of 18. In terms of content, no surprises were to be expected. Rather, Schmidt immediately got involved in the party-political dispute by showing her conviction that the “democratic part” of Parliament would conduct the discussion at a good level. The AfD didn’t mention them explicitly, but when they spoke of those who were “conspiring against those up there,” it was clear who they were aiming at.
The AfD understood that they were meant and gave back in rough currency. Tino Chrupalla, the AfD parliamentary group leader, did not care about arguments, but served resentment: “It is bleak about our country. Dealing with our Basic Law is becoming more and more shameless.” A little later, the other parliamentary group leader, Alice Weidel, also made it clear that the AfD parliamentary group rejects compulsory vaccination.
Up to the debate, the Union faction had seemed the least determined. Contradictory statements that one would not submit its own application for compulsory vaccination alternated with exactly the opposite statements. On Wednesday morning, the health policy spokesman for the Union faction, CDU MP Tino Sorge, announced on RTL and ntv that they would not join a group application, but would submit their own application soon after the orientation debate. As the Union’s first speaker, Sorge did not fulfill the hope for greater clarity of content. Rather, he criticized that the federal government had only answered questions from the Union about vaccination on Tuesday, and not satisfactorily.
It was the Green MP Paula Piechotta who vented her anger after just under an hour: “There are issues that are more important than party politics.” Piechotta, a doctor from Saxony, referred to the danger of the population becoming radicalized, subject to consider. She campaigned for compulsory vaccination from the age of 50.
As expected, the AfD faction around Alice Weidel is one of the opponents of compulsory vaccination.
:
Photo: Jens Gyarmaty
Then Wolfgang Kubicki stepped up to the lectern, and the debate gained momentum in terms of content, which was subsequently reached again and again. The FDP man and Bundestag Vice President, who initiated a group application against compulsory vaccination early on, began his speech by confessing that he had been vaccinated and boosted and felt a great deal of relief because he was now better protected against serious illnesses. But Kubicki does not consider a duty to be the right path. He pointed out that the vaccination does not lead to sterile immunity and hardly protects against infection. In addition, there is no risk of the health system being overburdened, nor can the Omicron wave be broken with compulsory vaccination. For legal reasons, Kubicki also believes that compulsory vaccination “in reserve” for a variant that no one knows yet is untenable.