“Red Lines” would not bring anything to anyone, and it also applies to the SPD to get out of the “mode of the traffic lights”, WadePhul told the broadcaster RTL and NTV on Thursday. In doing so, he criticized the determination of SPD boss Klingbeil not to support the rejection of asylum seekers at the borders.
Wadephul demanded that the migration are clear. An expected coalition of the Union and SPD get problems if it does not deliver. “That’s why I can only call the Social Democrats to break new ground now.”
The exploratory partners Union and SPD are far apart in migration policy. CDU/CSU require a significant tightening, which includes the exceptional rejection of refugees at the national borders – including asylum seekers. The SPD does not compatible this with the Basic Law or EU law.
SPD boss Klingbeil confirmed this on Wednesday evening: “I can tell you very clearly: The SPD will not participate in factual border closures,” he said in the ARD program “Maischberger”. “We cannot implement that nationally. And above all, it is European unreasonable.”
At a time when the answer to US President Donald Trump has to be a strong Europe, “it cannot be that the largest, strongest country in Europe is going and the borders visualized,” continued Klingbeil. “We won’t participate as a SPD.”
The party leader received support on Thursday from several SPD members who expressed themselves to the “Spiegel”. In the past few months, “extensive reforms of asylum and migration policy have been decided,” said SPD politician Tim Klüssendorf to the magazine. He cited the so -called security package as examples – several draft laws on internal security – and the common European asylum system (GEAS).
“Against this background, the scope for further tightening is limited to a minimum,” emphasized Klüssendorf, spokesman for the parliamentary left in the SPD faction. “In fact, factual border closures are under no circumstances to do the SPD.”
SPD MP Sebastian Roloff considers the Union’s migration demands to be unconstitutional. However, the explorers could “only agree on European law and constitutional regulations,” he emphasized in the “Spiegel”. “Measures that treat entire groups more worse to serve moods in the country are not expedient.”
“Instead of always deciding on new laws and regulations”, the “feasibility on site must be ensured”, the SPD interior politician Helge Lindh told the news magazine. Lindh also emphasized: “Factic border closures are not solutions and not a portable way. They are neither none nationally realized nor use to a strong, united Europe that is now particularly demanded.”
A legal opinion published on Thursday by Pro Asyl and Greenpeace confirmed the SPD’s view: It rates the Union’s demands in migration policy as illegal.
Unlimized border controls therefore violate Union, ie EU law and are “probably also unconstitutional”. Legal rejection even sees the right-wing expertise as “constitutional, union and international law”. In the event of implementation, the right to asylum stipulated in the Basic Law would be violated.
“National solutions endanger European cohesion and bring no solutions,” commented Tarq Alaows from Pro Asyl. Instead, “compliance with European standards is necessary that guarantees all asylum seekers a fair procedure and decent reception conditions”.
Union and SPD wanted to continue their explorations for a government in the federal government on Thursday. On Tuesday evening they agreed on an unprecedented financial package. The defense expenditure should therefore be exempted from the debt brake from one percent of the economic output. In addition, there should be a special fund of 500 billion euros for infrastructure.
