The Federal Council is to vote today in a special session on the new citizens’ income. The Union stands in the way, it blocks the planned protective assets and fewer possibilities for sanctions. Anne Will is about what a compromise might look like.
To say it in advance: At the end of the “Anne Will” program on Sunday evening, it becomes apparent what the compromise on citizen income could look like, which the Federal Council will vote on this Monday. The Bundestag had passed the bill on Thursday with the majority of the traffic light coalition. The union has concerns. She has the majority in the state chamber and will probably reject it there.
Then it has to go to the mediation committee, which is supposed to negotiate a compromise. Time is of the essence, says the Federal Employment Agency. Everything has to be wrapped up by November 25th. Otherwise there would be too little time for citizen income to start on January 1st. That would be devastating for recipients, many of whom are long-term unemployed. Because with the citizens’ money comes an increase in the previous Harz IV grants by a good 50 euros.
On Thursday, Ampel and Union agreed on one point: the standard rate should rise to 502 euros per month. “The increase is not the problem,” says Carsten Linnemann from the CDU on Sunday evening with Anne Will on ARD. But: “The traffic light wants to reverse the Agenda 2010 reforms.” Because most of the sanctions would be eliminated, Hartz IV recipients would no longer be under pressure to take on a job, training, retraining or rehabilitation measures.
This included, for example, German courses for migrants. In addition, the Union is against the fact that the assets and living conditions of citizens’ income recipients up to an amount of 60,000 euros do not have to be touched for two years. So far, Hartz IV recipients have had to disclose the status of their savings accounts and accounts, the maximum amount of the protected assets is 10,050 euros. In addition, many Hartz IV recipients have to fear moving house if their living space is too large.
SPD General Secretary Kevin Kühnert argues that rich people in particular “don’t have the chutzpah” to go to the job center and even apply for citizen’s income. In general, people with a lot of money are almost exclusively former self-employed people or those who have worked for many years beforehand. Berlin Labor Senator Katja Kipping from the left sees it similarly. She speaks of people who “wanted to fulfill a small dream in old age” with their savings. She also knows such cases. There are very few, she says, above all people who are approaching 60, who have lost their jobs and are then no longer able to find a new job for reasons of age.
But the main problem for the Union remains the sanctions. Carsten Linnemann: “The fact that people say that in the first six months there will be no sanctions for a breach of duty, no red card, has nothing to do with the principle of the welfare state.” Kevin Kühnert explains that there would be sanctions if you didn’t keep an appointment at the job center. Yes, Linnemann admits, “But only the second time around.”
At the moment, most sanctions for Hartz IV recipients are suspended. Previously, the employee at the job center could reduce the salary by 10 percent if a client did not appear by a specified date – but could not, but did not have to.
About three percent of the long-term unemployed did not follow the rules, emphasizes Kühnert. “We analyzed what practitioners in the job centers tell us. What it’s like with long-term unemployment, which is accompanied by bad personal experiences and effects, how much effort it takes to get people out of there, and how important it is to have a framework in place at an early stage building that is built on helping, not bullying.” Kühnert and Kipping largely agree. They rely on persuasion instead of pressure. However, in the course of the show, Kühnert admits that there are also people who have not found a job for twenty years.
For the President of the IFO Institute, Clemens Fuest, there is a real catch with citizen income. He is actually not sure whether sanctions have any effect on the long-term unemployed and would like to research this specifically for two years. However, he is bothered by the practice of additional income opportunities. They prevented people from taking up employment at all.
In fact, the long-term unemployed are currently only allowed to earn 100 euros on top of their state benefits. After that, they have to repay their earnings in stages. Fuest: “One has strong suggestions to work very little.” Or maybe more work is done – but then black.
Fuest, on the other hand, demands that additional income from singles of up to 630 euros should be fully taken into account. Those who earn more should only give up 40 percent of their earnings. This makes it easier to get back into a full-time job.
After almost an hour of discussion, it slowly became clear that the goals and demands of Ampel and Union are not that far apart. Both want an increase in salaries, both want to get long-term unemployed people who are difficult to place into jobs via the social labor market, where part of the salary is paid over several years. “The aim of the reform is that people are given long-term employment from which they can make a living, subject to social security contributions and for an unlimited period,” says Kühnert.
In principle, Linnemann also sees it that way. He is also in favor of more opportunities to earn additional income, and he suddenly no longer speaks of pressure, but instead relies on personal responsibility, even for the long-term unemployed: “The money doesn’t fall from heaven. We have to work for it ourselves. We rely on that. And if they do too If the traffic light is ready, then we’re in.”
