Even after the submission of a draft for a new Infection Protection Act (IfSG) by Federal Minister of Health Karl Lauterbach (SPD) and Federal Minister of Justice Marco Buschmann (FDP), the final regulations for the coming autumn and winter are still being wrestled behind the scenes – especially within the FDP parliamentary group .
As WELT learned, the participants in a parliamentary group meeting on Thursday agreed to press for easing in talks with the SPD and Greens in the coming days before the bill goes to parliament. For example, the obligation to wear masks on planes should be abolished – just as it has long been the case in the rest of Europe, with the exception of Spain. In addition, the hurdles for reintroducing the obligation to wear masks in schools from the fifth grade are to be raised.
It is unclear how the traffic light partners will react to the demands. After long discussions in the past few days, a fundamental “no” to new corona measures is no longer an option for the FDP parliamentary group; the deputies agreed on this at the meeting.
“We don’t need a government crisis now. As the FDP, we didn’t want a new infection protection law, but we are in a coalition and responsible for our country,” said a member of parliament at WELT, referring to the Ukraine war and the energy crisis. In the event of an emergency, the mask indoors is “a small restriction. It’s like wearing a helmet when riding a moped. Stability is more important to me for our country.”
According to WELT information, the FDP leadership now wants to find out to what extent the traffic light partners are still willing to make changes. On Monday evening, the liberals want to approve the IfSG draft. The matter will then be discussed further in Parliament. The current draft law provides for a general obligation to wear FFP2 masks on long-distance trains and planes from October 1st to April 7th, 2023. While this regulation is controversial, there is agreement on the FFP2 and test obligation for hospitals and care facilities.
In order to ensure the functionality of the health system or other critical infrastructure, the individual federal states can also rely on different models for mask and test requirements indoors, including schools. In a particularly threatening situation – exact criteria as to what this means have not been specified – distance requirements and even mask requirements can also be imposed in outdoor areas.
The planned new rules within the professional association of paediatricians caused a stir, which on Thursday sent a WELT letter to the Bundestag’s health committee. In it, President Thomas Fischbach and Johannes Huebner, Head of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Department, write that when they looked at the draft law, they noticed a situation “that requires your urgent intervention”.
According to this, in the event of “a banal but suspicious cold”, children could not go to kindergarten or school for so long, leave kindergarten and school immediately and only return when Corona has been ruled out. In addition, children who have tested positive for Covid would have to submit a medical certificate before they can go back to kindergarten or school.
“The regulation means an extreme tightening of the legal situation,” write Fischbach and Huebner: “In the 30 months of the pandemic, such a health certificate, which usually has to be in writing, was not considered necessary.” It could not be justified from a medical and infectious point of view .
A new, time-consuming bureaucracy is expected for the practices: “Instead of dealing with our patients, we will have to deal with the drafting of written certificates. Parents will usually have to stay away from work an extra day because they are looking after their child and have to take them to the pediatrician.”
Contrary to the assertion by the federal government that day-care centers and schools should remain open regardless of the incidence, there is “a state-ordered absence from community facilities” that massively restricts the fundamental rights of children and young people: “We urgently ask you not to implement this nonsensical and highly bureaucratic regulation.”
