Mayor, Hamburg is at the top of the country comparison for corona incidences with 56.5 - is the time of easing over?

Anna-Lena Ripperger

Editor in politics.

  • Follow I follow

Matthias Wyssuwa

Political correspondent for Northern Germany and Scandinavia based in Hamburg.

  • Follow I follow

We were among the first to have a vacation.

That is why we are the first to be affected by the return trip problem.

Unfortunately, despite our urgent request, the federal government has not issued a safe entry regulation.

We had already requested that in June.

A large part of the infections in recent weeks was - as expected - due to trips to risk areas.

We have lost ground in the race between the Delta variant and the vaccinations.

But has a new entry regulation been in effect since August, which provides for more tests and stricter quarantine rules?

That no longer helps us in Hamburg, but for the other countries it is good that the regulation has been improved.

But it is still not what it should be.

What is missing?

A quarantine after traveling to risk areas should only be lifted after five days if the PCR test is negative.

Rapid antigen tests are not suitable for this.

We discussed how to deal with returning travelers a year ago - including the reminders from Hamburg.

Yes, it is bad that the federal government did not learn from the experiences of last autumn.

The infections from abroad were also a strong factor in the second wave.

This autumn, the question of which restrictions there must be and for whom should become acute again.

Is a lockdown still conceivable for everyone?

It will mean that certain restrictions apply only to the unvaccinated.

In this way, we can avoid another lockdown for business, culture, education and private life.

When the majority of people are no longer at risk from vaccination, we cannot put restrictions on the entire population again.

All adults should be vaccinated now.

Because it is important for the protection of your own health, because it serves the common good and because sooner or later it will result in a difficult situation without vaccination.

Many politicians, including the Prime Minister of your SPD, recently sounded very different.

They spoke out against unequal treatment and against pressure.

It will boil down to this with a corresponding increase in the incidence.

A complete lockdown for everyone is disproportionate when a large part of the population is vaccinated and everyone can get vaccination.

How do you answer those who then accuse you of compulsory vaccination through the back door?

This is something else.

We had a strict vaccination requirement for smallpox, for example, which was completely eliminated.

This is not planned for Corona.

But if we get into a situation in which we have to act in the autumn, we are faced with two alternatives: a lockdown for everyone, which I do not think is justifiable, or restrictions for those who do not have a vaccination, although this has been recommended for a long time will.

A lockdown for the unvaccinated?

Restrictions that do not affect vaccinated people.

And what are the specific restrictions?

Vaccinated people could, for example, continue to attend events in culture and sport, while this is not possible for unvaccinated people with a correspondingly high incidence.

Traveling will also be easier for those who have been vaccinated.

From America, for example, one hears that entry should only be allowed for vaccinated people.

We have to be clear: vaccination is our way out of the pandemic.

Those who get vaccinated now protect themselves and others, especially small children and people who cannot be vaccinated for certain reasons.

Keywords: