Madam Vice-President, the current protective measures expire on September 23.

However, the government will not present any new draft law before the parliamentary summer recess.

Is this a mistake?

Helen Bubrowski

Political correspondent in Berlin.

  • Follow I follow

Yes.

I think we would have done well to introduce a draft law now, or at least present key points and discuss them with everyone involved over the summer.

My greatest concern is that we will again find ourselves in a situation in which everything is being put on the table in a hurry, the hearings are being held in a great hurry, and the Federal Council will agree on Friday.

And on Monday, the regulations have to be implemented in schools, in companies and everywhere.

This puts unnecessary pressure on people.

And it unsettles many.

The FDP has insisted on waiting for the report that the council of experts will present this Friday.

Does this make sense?

Evaluation is important.

But: We know which measures are specifically helpful.

There are enough studies on this.

I don't think it's particularly responsible in the fight against a pandemic to wait for an expert opinion so that you don't have to do anything for the time being.

Federal Minister of Justice Buschmann (FDP) has said that the state can only prescribe masks if this is “evidence-based”.

Is it undermining trust in science?

There are so many studies showing that wearing a mask helps that it is a very simple and very sensible measure.

Marco Buschmann knows that too.

I expect farsighted, responsible action from the Minister of Justice.

What protective measures must be included in the new law?

In the event that a new virus variant emerges or the healthcare system reaches its limits, we must remain prepared.

It's not about new measures, tried and tested must then be possible again: the obligation to wear masks indoors, contact restrictions for certain areas, special protection for sensitive groups in order to ensure that children in particular can attend school.

And: We should also be able to enable many more home offices than is the case now.

What is the goal?

Corona protection is also economic protection.

I am surprised that the FDP in particular does not see this.

Last autumn and winter we had contact restrictions and home office regulations, but there were still 63 million days of lost work, as estimated by the Institute for Labor Market and Occupational Research.

That means, converted, that there were production losses of more than seven billion euros because people were ill.

That's not even counting what that means for growth.

If there are fewer safeguards this fall, the damage will be even greater.

And that at a time when we already have high energy costs and delivery bottlenecks.

I know companies that are already taking protective measures of their own accord because they don't want to wait for politicians.

What would be the worst scenario we have to prepare for?

That there are not enough people to maintain our infrastructure: hospitals, care facilities, schools, but also mobility or the energy and water supply.

You don't expect a particularly deadly variant?