the greens and the Left want a larger parliamentary reform push. This Thursday, the Bundestag debated the requests of the two groups, with the aim of, that Committee meetings in future be held in public. The Parliamentary Manager of the Greens, Britta Haßelmann, told the daily mirror: “What is negotiated in the Bundestag and in committees, all something. Therefore, we demand to make Committee meetings generally open to the public.“ Meetings should also be via live stream transferred. “It is time that the Union and the SPD to block efforts to be more transparent,” said Haßelmann. “It is not clear why the important decision-making processes are withheld from the Public.” In the basic law it hot: “The Bundestag shall meet in public”.
The concerns of the Green extends even further. In the government survey in the future, all Cabinet members should be present and not, as in the past, often by Parliamentary state secretaries represent. In addition, the topics of the deputies should be defined, not by the government. Also should increase Europe’s political issues on the agenda of the interviews, particularly in the context of EU summit meetings.
More transparency, more vitality
The efforts to make the Parliament work more transparent and the debate culture of living, began in the fall of 2017. At that time, several groups called for the SPD, a Reform of the government surveys. It was decided, among other things, that three Times in the year, the Chancellor (or the Chancellor) in a larger survey by the deputies. The concern prospered, but. Now Green and Left a new impetus to want to bring in parliamentary reform. The Left, see the Committee of public as a confidence-building measure towards the citizens. Also, the courts have already ruled in this direction.
More about
Opposition, and the SPD are calling for reform of the European Parliament the Bundestag to be more vivid and more transparent
Albert, radio days, the mirror in the Morning
for Free order
Whether you are going to get very far, however, is questionable. In the Union rejects a fundamental Public nature of Committee meetings, and speaks of the “showcase applications” of the Opposition. Already now it is possible, by decision, open meetings. In the previous legislature, which had been in 600 of the 2700 sessions. The social Democrats tendon is the risk that, in the case of a fundamental Public the actual advice in non-public spaces shift. In addition, each Deputy could not report about the meetings in public, even if they are open to the public. The FDP opposes a flat rate scheme, not all subjects were suitable for public meetings. The AfD does not share, in turn, the primary concern of the amendments of the Greens and the Left, but thinks an “undifferentiated reversal” of the rule-exception-relationship more relationship help. Green and Left want to achieve that only in exceptional cases, the committees may decide that the Public be excluded.
