Will the administration be more expensive despite less a member?
The remark went in the round of the many other topics your inaugural speech a little below. “After the reduction of the Bundestag At 630 seats, we are rightly confronted with the question of whether a smaller parliament cannot get by with less own resources, ”said Bundestag President Julia Klöckner (CDU) and continued: « The question is justified. I promise not to avoid it. » In the Reichstag building, which is often compared to a small village in the self -presentation, the alarm bells shrill. A total of 3240 employees in the Bundestag administration of a « meaningful activity » according to « and ensure the future viability of our country ». This is now questioned.
In the past, the number of deputies in the Bundestag rose from 598 to the last 736. the voting right reform the number of seats reduced by 106. The question of simultaneous streamlining of the administration is entitled – and it was asked by Julia Klöckner before the speech. CDU general secretary Carsten Linnemann, for example, demanded in a conversation with the Editorial network Germany Similar to reducing the number of MPs, a reduction in the Bundestag administration by 15 percent. In an interview with our editorial team, Linnemann called the Bundestag administration – who, like ministries and Chancellery is a so -called Supreme Federal Authority, – not by name, but promised a reduction in the number of government officials.
Dimensite the administration of the Bundestag? Linnemann rowed back
« For decades, the parties have been writing the reduction in bureaucracy in their election programs. But nobody has the courage to tackle it in concrete terms, » said Linnemann and promised a specific percentage for the Union’s election program. But that did not find itself there later, and beyond that, the general secretary seems to have left the courage. When asked whether he was still in general and the number of 15 percent in particular, the CDU press office said: « Due to the ongoing coalition negotiations, we can unfortunately not comment on this at the moment and ask for understanding. »
What the Bundestag administration costs is in Household individual plan 02 to read. 1.2 billion euros are estimated there for 2024. Personnel expenses make up the thickest chunks, but there are also smaller items such as « for catering with refreshments in meetings for a special occasion ». The expenditure last went up, and that should remain so despite the lower number of MPs. The Bundestag administration, the Federal Audit Office, criticizes « from first constant and then increasing expenses ». For 2026 it is around 1.25 and the year after 1.26 billion euros.
Saving does not matter
« Saving does not matter to the Bundestag, » is a heading in the upcoming April issue of the federal taxpayer, and further: « Although the Bundestag has been reduced, it will remain an expensive parliament. » The taxpayers’ association directs the view that the Bundestag administration and the parliamentary company have been enormously expanded over the past ten years. In the meantime, “a whopping 32 different properties iin the hearts of Berlin with a total of around 6,300 offices. ” Since there are fewer members of the parliament and after leaving the BSW and FDP, there are less fraction or group employees, more than 500 offices would be unnecessary according to calculations by the taxpayer association.
The civil servant roof union « DBB civil servant association and tariff union » warns with a view to a possible reduction in the Bundestag administration. « Every job cuts must precede a specific task criticism, » said The Federal Chairman Ulrich SilberbacH of our editorial team. « Which task is lost or can be done differently – less personnel -intensive -? » Silberbach said that the work of the Bundestag does not automatically reduce the reduction in the MP, Silberbach explained. « What services no longer have to be provided? Which sessions, bodies, requirements fall out by reducing the plenary? » Only from the answers to these questions do « realistic savings potential. »
