A shadow of unease hangs over the impending parliamentary vote on the government’s contentious pension reform package, according to former Chancellor’s Office and Economics Minister Peter Altmaier. Speaking to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Altmaier, a prominent figure within the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), acknowledged the likelihood of the bill passing but cautioned against a scenario heavily reliant on the abstention of the Left party. Such a reliance, he suggested, would signify a problematic fragility within the governing coalition.
While stopping short of a direct accusation, Altmaier subtly deflected blame from the Social Democratic Party (SPD), arguing that attributing sole responsibility to them would be overly simplistic. He emphasized the potential for productive compromise with the SPD, citing their shared commitment to fiscal responsibility through the “Schwarze Null” policy – a vow to maintain a balanced budget – as a foundation for collaboration. Dismissing the prevalent narrative portraying the SPD as having shifted significantly to the left, Altmaier highlighted the continued presence of pragmatic, economically-minded politicians within the party.
However, Altmaier’s reservations extended beyond the coalition dynamics. He expressed understanding for the resistance voiced by the Junge Union, the CDU’s youth wing, concerning the proposed increase in the pension level. Altmaier conceded that preventing the increase wasn’t an absolute imperative, yet he voiced deep concerns regarding the accompanying price tag of €120 billion. He warned that such a substantial financial commitment would severely curtail the fiscal leeway available to future generations. He proposed an alternative pathway – extending the automatic increase in retirement age by an additional five or six years – as a potential compromise that could have garnered broader support among dissenting voices. This suggestion implicitly critiques the government’s current approach as potentially unsustainable and insufficiently sensitive to the long-term economic burden it places on younger citizens.