Schroeder in court. There are quite a few people, especially in his party, who can draw a lot of positive things from these words. In this case, however, it was not about a renewed request by the comrades to finally throw him out of the party. It was about the profane. About offices and staff. Around 400,000 euros a year, which this former chancellor service cost the taxpayer last year. At least until May last year, when the budget committee of the Bundestag canceled this privilege for the former chancellor.
It would have been better if Schröder had waived this privilege of his own accord. But at least accepted that he should no longer receive it. But that’s not how this Gerhard Schröder is made. Give in? Never. See you in court!
Such a former chancellor’s office includes employees, representative rooms in the Bundestag and a driving service – all of which should help in the fulfillment of so-called “follow-up official duties”. Just how long will it be tracked? And is there still something to be tracked? Or does this former chancellor instead of “follow-up official duties” for the benefit of the country not rather conduct ongoing private business for the benefit of state-owned Russian energy companies?
Schröder never made a secret of any of this. The fact that the budget committee only noticed this just in time for Putin’s attack on Ukraine and suddenly forced MPs to cancel the benefits they had been granted for 17 years without complaint may seem petty and mean. Schröder himself may consider it exaggerated or even excessive, just like the furor that has hit him for the past year, as if he himself were the war criminal and not his friend Putin.
You can call that opportunistic or opportunistic. Only one thing is not: arbitrariness. Even if Schröder and his lawyer see it that way. An official outfit is not a pension entitlement that you have worked out over the course of years of deprivation in office. It is granted – or withdrawn. And it is Parliament’s sole right to decide on government spending. It is only the members of parliament who decide how much tax money is spent on what. No minister has so much power, no federal chancellor and certainly no former federal chancellor. D
One could now demand that it is finally defined what exactly is to be understood by these ongoing tasks. It could also be regulated by law how the equipment for former employees should look like in the future. How long, for what and under what conditions it is granted.
Rules are always good. They will not prevent us from a chancellor making questionable deals after their term of office in order to earn a little extra. But then not only on your own account, but also at your own expense. As long as there are no rules, only decency counts.
We and he would have been spared a lot if Schröder had had the size to give up of his own accord. It’s just not that big. It would have been unthinkable for him for two reasons.
He needed this defeat.
