Dietmar Bartsch, the Democratic Left’s parliamentary group representative on the Budget Committee, strongly objected to the proposal by SPD faction leader Matthias Miersch to authorize additional debt due to the conflict in Iran. Bartsch expressed deep concern about the overall handling of national finances, arguing that past borrowing has not been adequately committed to the promised investments and structural reforms. He stated that saddling the government with unprecedented war-related costs was unacceptable.
Speaking to the news channel “Welt” on Monday, Bartsch criticized the current debate surrounding the debt brake, labeling the entire situation a major problem. Although he believes the debt brake itself is fundamentally flawed, he stressed that making exceptions for military expenditures while maintaining all other spending rules is “even more false”.
Bartsch offered a qualified view on debt in general, noting that debt is not inherently bad; the critical issue is the intended purpose of the funds. When, as is the case now, the impetus is to cover all existing problems simply by injecting more money, he is resolute against it. Instead, he argued that the focus must be on implementing the “reforms that were promised” particularly in areas like the pension system and healthcare, aiming squarely at national cohesion.
While acknowledging that a legislative resolution for “exceptional emergency situations” might be constitutional in an ongoing war, Bartsch fears that this loophole will only lead to higher defense expenditures, diverting funds away from genuinely needed investments. He asserted that the government cannot absorb these costs if the defense ethos promotes the idea that “whatever it takes” can be spent, potentially wasting billions of Euros.
Furthermore, Bartsch criticized the initial “special fund” meant for reforms, pointing out that the money has not been used as promised. He warned that even when this special fund runs out, the country will face severe financial difficulties unless genuine structural reforms are implemented. He concluded by criticizing the current administration for the mismatch between its actions and what the Chancellor himself advocated when he was the opposition leader during election campaigns, suggesting that this discrepancy in political positions only exacerbates the national crisis. He stated that profound and urgent reforms are necessary to secure the fragile unity of the country.
