Philipp Amthor grants errors in the Freedom of Information Act. However, he did not promote the abolition personally, he says. Lanz has doubts.
Journalist Karina Mößbauer from “The Pioneer” did not paint a good picture of Amthor in the talk show. As the chairman of the working group for state modernization in the coalition negotiations, he “relatively self -sufficient” wrote the abolition of the IFG into the final paper as chairman of the working group. This gives the impression that Amthor wanted to cover up something, the journalist criticized and attested to the politician an own goal – whereupon Amthor nodded.
“It was not a blast communicative now,” said the Christian Democrat at “Markus Lanz”. He asked several times whether Amthor ensured that the abolition of the law was requested in the current form. “No, not alone. It was the wish of the entire group,” contradicted Amthor.
Basically, Amthor advocated reforming the IFG and making it more efficient. Only that was meant by the decision of his working group. As well, “reforming” instead of “abolishing” could have been written, he said after a corresponding objection from Lanz. Amthor did not seem to be able to convince the moderator. Instead, Lanz attested to his guest to the end of the campaign that the campaign will live a “certain spicy aftertaste”.
Which is why Lanz was so suspicious: the IFG has made it possible for citizens to request official documents from federal authorities since 2006. Various scandals, including the fact that Amthor as a young member of lobbyism for the US Tech company Augustus Intelligence, had operated a directors. “My biggest political mistake,” said Amthor at Lanz.
Amthor emphasized that the IFG is not a focus for the Union in modernizing the state. Nevertheless, there was also a fundamental difference to the future coalition partner. He was against abolition, emphasized Alexander Schweitzer (SPD), Prime Minister of Rhineland-Palatinate, who is also involved in the coalition negotiations. A reform could be checked. But especially in times like this, transparency for citizens should not be lost and that should also be in the coalition agreement.
In border controls and tax reforms, “Markus Lanz” showed other differences between the Christian and the Social Democrats. Swiss warned the Union against relieving certain groups for tax purposes, but not to be countered. Then in the end countries and municipalities would have to pay the invoice for federal politics and in the end the state will be made incapable of action.
“There is no tax increase,” said Amthor, the Union’s promise from the election campaign confirmed. The abolition of the solidarity contribution and the withdrawal of the legalization of cannabis are still goals. “There are more important topics,” said Amthor, however, about the possible cannabis ban.
But what can the Union citizen believe in the debt brake after the lightning -fast turning turn? Merz is also under suspicion of wobbly pudding internally, reported Mößbauer. Amthor admitted that the reform of the debt brake was an “enormous mortgage on the credibility” of the Union. He contradicted the judgment of Mößbauer and Lanz that the SPD ran the Union over the table during the coalition talks, and called on the Social Democrats for constructive cooperation: “We are being measured on whether this government is delivering.”
