For the municipalities, which have been registering undesirable developments in migration policy for weeks, the "refugee summit" in the Federal Ministry of the Interior was just the proverbial drop in the bucket.
There are new accommodation options, but everything else remained open.
That is not enough to care for more than a million Ukrainian refugees and displaced persons - in winter and with this war situation there will be even more - and a dramatically increasing number of asylum seekers.
Municipalities don't get what they need.
At least the district administrators are calling for a clear limit on immigration.
Nancy Faeser has announced stronger border controls.
This applies to asylum seekers and the old, unresolved problem of immigration from safe third countries, although there is little prospect of a regular right of residence.
Since repatriations are carried out rhetorically but not in fact, the erosion of the right to asylum, which has been known for years, continues here because its rejection often has no consequences.
The equivalent at the European level is the everyday practice of simply “waving through” migrants, which contradicts all legal and political assurances.
No European burden sharing
In the case of the refugees from the Ukraine, too, there can be no question of an appropriate European burden-sharing.
Germany and the frontline states in the east each take care of many times the number of refugees that other states take in.
In the case of Germany, this is also due to the "pull factor" that registered refugees from Ukraine can claim basic security immediately after their arrival.
But Faeser does not want to move away from this.
Nor does the federal government want to insist on the "solidarity mechanism" that is planned in the EU for a fair distribution of the burden of refugees.
The traffic light coalition is well received by activists and organizations who consider immigration limits to be evil.
But no district administrator or mayor can be really happy with this policy.